BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME
FROM THE
SAGE ENDOWMENT FUND
THE GIFT OF
1891
/$//.';^^.^!(7..K <e//:///.^.zi..^...
.5474
DS 73.1.r'iT"i900''""'' '""'"■^
^%mm!f«««ISmSSn..'^°^" to 'he end
3 1924 028 556 771
Cornell University
Library
The original of this bool< is in
the Cornell University Library.
There are no known copyright restrictions in
the United States on the use of the text.
http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924028556771
EARLY
BABYLONIAN HISTORY
■»—
t
DOWN TO THE END OF THE FOURTH
DYNASTY OF UR
TO WHICH IS APPENDED AN ACCOUNT OF
THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
OF BABYLONIAN TABLETS IN THE GENERAL THEOLOGICAL
SEMINARY, NEW YORK, U.S.A.
Rev. HUGO EADAU, A.M., B.D., Ph.D.
MAYO FELLOW IN THE GENERAL THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
(Jim "Sovft
OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS AMERICAN BRANCH
91 & 93 FIFTH AVENUE
LONDON : HENRY FROWDE
1900
HORACE HART, PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY
TO
THE VERY REV.
E. A. HOFFMAN
D.D., D.C.L., LL.D.
DEAN OF THE GENERAL THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
NEW YORK CITY, U.S.A.
THIS IS AFFECTIONATELY DEDICATED
AS A SMALL TOKEN OF GREAT
GRATITUDE BY THE
AUTHOR
PREFACE
The following pages, herewith issued, were written
as a Doctor's Dissertation, and submitted as such to the
Faculty of Philosophy, Columbia University, New York
City, N.Y., in April, 1898. Ever since August of the
same year the book has been in the press, yet I have not
failed to supplement it by all the inscriptions which have
been published up to April i, 1900. Many able and scholarly
histories of the period treated by me have been written.
I mention among others only Tiele, Babylonisch-assyrische
Geschichte, 1 886-8 ; Hommel, Geschichte Babyloniens und
Assyriens, 1885 ; Winckler, Geschichte Babyloniens und
Assyriens, 1892 ; Meyer, Geschichte des Alterthums, B. i.,
1884; Miirdter-Delitzsch, Geschichte Babyloniens, second
edition, 1891 ; Maspero, iDawn of Civilization, New York,
1895; McCurdy, History, Prophecy, and the Monuments,
1894 ; Rogers, Outlines of the History of Early Babylonia,
1895; Ball, Light from the East, 1899; Winckler, Das
alte Westasien, in Helmott's Weltgeschichte, Dritter Band,
erste Halfte, 1899.
From the above-given list it would seem as if another
history were superfluous. Yet I have ventured to write
another, having the following points especially in view : —
vi PREFACE
I. To arrange as far as possible the kings of the different
dynasties so far known to us according to a certain chrono-
logical order. Whether I have succeeded in this remains
for the reader to decide. Here I want to say that I have
my doubts with regard to the dynasty of Isin as well
as that of Ur III. It may very well be possible that
Ishbigirra, king of Isin, belongs to another — either earlier
or later— dynasty. In this case we would have to divide
that dynasty, and either leave the other kings where we
have placed them, or put them after Ur IV. Gungunu
and his dynasty would have to undergo then, of course, the
same fate.
3. To transcribe and translate — wherever it was possible
— all those texts which are not to be found in K. B. iii ^.
By doing this I thought to help not only the historian, but
also beginners in the study of Sumerian inscriptions, of
whom I am the first and foremost. Everybody who has
studied these oldest of all inscriptions knows the difficulties
that are to be encountered. It would have been great
arrogance on my part to have attempted to translate them,
were it not for the excellent works of such scholars as Jensen,
Hilprecht, and Thureau-Dangin. They — and especially the
latter — have been my teachers ; on the basis of their tran-
scriptions and translations those to be found in the following
pages have been made. While thus attempting to transcribe
and translate these inscriptions, I first tried — wherever neces-
sary — to identify the signs either according to T. C. or to
E. C, which latter book came too late into my hands to be
quoted throughout. Had it reached me earlier, it would
have saved me considerable anxiety, and probably pre-
vented my making many mistakes. After the sign in
question had been identified I tried to establish its meaning,
which has always been done according to Br. and H. W. B.,
PREFACE vu
thus affording a means to control the transcription and
translation.
3. To give in a note under each respective king all in-
scriptions that belong to that king — where they have been
published, where transcribed and translated. In this way
I thought to help the reader in comparing the different
translations so far extant with each other — in what respect
they agree and where they differ. If there should be found
some inscriptions already published that are not mentioned,
this is due to the fact that the libraries which I was per-
mitted to consult did not contain the books I was so
anxiously looking for,
4. To presuppose some knowledge of the grammar of the
Sumerian language by the reader. One may rightly expect
that even a beginner in Sumerian should have studied the
grammars of Haupt and Hommel before attempting to
translate Old Babylonian inscriptions.
5. To avoid deductions from the inscriptions as far as
possible, for every reader can himself make them from
the documents, provided that the translation be correct.
Whether it was possible for me to give in all cases the
correct translations masters of Sumeriology alone can
determine.
6. To avoid all legendary matter. This explains why
I should have begun with Enshagkushanna rather than
with the ' kings before the Flood.' History, if it wants
to be history, must be based upon original documents, and
not upon legends.
I would like to add here one word about the pronuncia-
tion Sir-pur-la-^'. In Gudea, Cyl. B, v. aa (and only there,
as far as I know), the name of the city is written Sir-fur-'^',
without LA ! This, no doubt, seems to speak — if we do
not want to accept a mistake of the scribe — for the pro-
yiii PREFACE
nunciation Sir-puUla-^' , the LA containing only the over-
hanging vowel. With this, however, is not yet praved ,
absolutely that we now have to pronounce, with Prof.
Hommel, Sir-gul-la-''' and to identify it with Zerghulj
for Sir-pu-la-''' is Tell-Loh, and not Zerghul. For such
an interchange of r and /, see Hommel, S. L. p. 139 h,
and comp. the Assyrian and later Babylonian martu,
maltti, maitti; Kardu-nias, Kaldu,Kasdu (D'"!'f3); see also
Delitzsch, Assyr. Gram. § ^i, p. lao. Hence this much
only we can say : the sign for PUR had in all probability
also the value PUL,
While writing the History, Hilprecht's O. B. I. vol. i.
Part n. was accessible to me only with the paging it had as
a part of the publication of the American Philosophical
Society. The following may be of help for those who use
Part n. with the new paging. Abstract in each case 214,
and you get the page according to the other edition. E. g.
•p. 263 is = 263 — 214 = p. 49 of the new edition.
The different lists added at the end of the book may be
useful. I have also prepared a glossary, giving the context,
the places where the expression is to be found, and, if
possible, also the translation. This glossary includes not
only all the inscriptions here translated, but also those of
K. B. iii^. Cylinders A and B of Gudea, and the Sumerian
inscriptions of Hammurabi. It being arranged according
to the signs as given in BriJnnow might make it a helpful
appendix to that publication. If it should be desired,
I shall issue it in the near future.
If the whole arrangement of the book should be accept-
able to the learned world, I purpose to treat also the other
periods in the same way. The material for the history of
Dynasties A-C of -Babylon I have gathered already. ,
PREFACE IX
It only remains to thank the Very Rev. E. A. Hoffman,
D.D. (Oxon.), D.C.L., LL.D., Dean of the Gen. Theol. Sem.,
New York City, my highly esteemed friend, for his kindness
and liberality. Had it not been for his help and generosity
these pages would never have been published. May he
kindly accept these my ' first-fruits,' and may he be
spared for the General Theological Seminary, as well as
for science and research, for still a good many years to
come! Also to the Rev. C. W. E. Body, D.D.,
D.C.L., Professor of Old Testament Literature in the
Gen. Theol. Sem., New York City, my heartiest thanks
are due. His assistance in acquiring and arranging the
' E. A. Hoffman Collection,' as well as his help in reading
the. proof-sheets, and the many other kindnesses and
favours shown to me during the last five years are and
always will be remembered most kindly by his friend
and pupil. To express to my teacher and revered
friend, Professor R. J. H. Gottheil, my sense of lasting
obligation gives me special pleasure. During three years
of special study his library, time, and scholarship have been
most generously at my disposal.
Hugo Radau.
Munich, Bavaria,
April I, I goo.
CONTENTS
The numbers in parentheses ( ) indicate the pages.
PAGES
I. Introduction ........ 1-43
Chronology based upon {a) incidental refereiues and (i) palaeo-
graphic evidence (3). Eponym Canon. List of kings. Assyrian
mode of dating documents. The eclipse under Pur-Sagale (4). Date
of Nabfl-na'id. ^AR-GE-NA and Naram-Sin mentioned by Nabfl-
na'id. Date of Naram-Sin. SAR-GE-NA an abbreviation of
Sharganishar^U. (i) Palaeographic evidence (8). List of signs. Three
great periods (9). (c ) Chronology of the kings and patesis of Shir-
purla (12). Dynasty of Ur-Nina (15). Kings preceding Ur-NinS.
Representatives of the second period of palaeography (17). Rulers
between Lummadur and Ur-Ba'u (18). Younger patesis of Shir-
purla (19). Representatives of the third period of palaeography (33).
Ur n. (24). Nisin (35). Ur III. and IV. (26). {d) Chronological
Table, (e) Dates assigned to the different rulers (30). Date of
Gudea according to Thureau-Dangia (31); Lehmann and Winckler
(32). Ur-Ningirsu en ki-ag <.dingir) Nind (35). Another arrange-
ment of the younger patesis of Shirpnrla (39). Palaeography ac-
cording to Lehmann (42).
n. Lord of Kengi . 43-46
Enshagkushanna (43). O. B. I, 90-93 (45).
III. Rulers of Shirpurla ...... 46-1 a i
A. Dynasty of Urukagina (47 ff.). Titles of Urukagina (46).
Translations : Le Clercq, ii. pi. viii. No. I (48) ; D^c. pi. 5, No. 1(51);
Dec. 32 = Barrel-Cylinder (53). En^egal\c,^). Lugalshuggur (56).
Their contemporaries are in all probability the foUovfing kings or
patesis of Kish : U-dug-? (55, 2); Mesilim (55); Lugal-da?-ak\
(56. 2)-
B. Dynasty of Ur-Nind (56 ff.). Translations : Dec. 3'", 4 (58) ;
V>ic. s'", 3 (61) ; D^c. 31, I (64) ; R. A. iv. p. 133, i (64) ; R. A. iv,
CONTENTS XI
FACES
p. io6, II (65) ; Dec. 2^>', 2 (66) ; Dec. 3'% i (66) ; D^c. 2" >, i (68).
Akurgal(6^'). The other sons of Ur-Nind {16). Titles of Ur-NinS,
Akurgal (70), and Eannatum (71). Enannatum I. (72). Transla-
tions: R. A. iii. p. 31 (14) ; Comptes Rendus, 1899, p. 348, pi. li.
(72). Eannatum {11 S.). StMe des Vautours compared with C&ne of
Entemena and Galet A (74). Treaty with Gishban (74!!.). Mesilim,
Ush, Gunammide, Enakalli (75). Inscriptions recording the treaty :
D^c. 3 A, col. i. (76) ; Dec. 3 A, col. iii. 4, D^c. 3 A, col. iv. I, and
D^c. 4««, F^ col. iv. 2 ff. (77) ; Dec. 3"'=, d', col. i. i ff. (78) ; D^c. 4'°',
f', col. iii. 4 ; Dec. 3 A, col. ii. 2 (80); C. T. 23580 (81, note i).
Name of the st^le (8l). Eannatum's victory over different cities (82).
Becomes king of Kish (82). Eannatum as administrator and builder
(83). Galet A (83). Die. 4"'", D^ col. iii. 7-15 : Gunammide
(87 note). R. A. iv. p. 122, No. 2 (= Die. a'*'-, fig. 5) (87 note).
Deo. 31, No. 2 a,b (93). Gishban invades the territory of Shirpurla
again (95). Urlumma. Enannatum I. (95). Entemena. Victory
over Urlumma. Hi becomes patesi of Gishban (96). Subscription
of the C6ne (97). The C6ne of Entemena (97 ff.). Situation of
Gishban (110), Guedin (in), and Kish (na). The building in-
scriptions of Entemena. Translations : Tablette A = R. A. ii. 148,
149(112); Die, pi. 6, No. 2 (116) ; Die. 43 and 43''" (Vase d'argent)
(116); Die. s'ls, No. 2 (Dudu) (117); C. T. part V. No. 12061
(=A. B. K. No. 4) (117); O. B. I. 115 (118); O. B. I. 117, 116
(119); Die. 31, 3 ( = R. A. ii. 87) (13). Enannatum II. (119).
Inscriptions translated : Die. 6, 4 (13) ; C. T. 23287 (120). Lum-
madur (120). Inscription (15, i).
IV. Kings of Kish and Gishban .... 1 21-150
A. Kish :
U-dttg-? (121, i). Mesilim (121). His inscription (16, 143, 144).
Lugal-da?-ak? (121, 2). Enne-Ugun (121). Inscriptions: O. B. I.
103, 104 (123); 102, no, los (124). Urzaguddu {i2t„ le^i). Lu-
galtarsi (125). The meaning of the titles lugal KIS and lugal
^/5-/ij respectively (126). Manisktusu (12<;). Alusharshid {\2'}).
Translations : O. B. I. 5 (128) ; O. B. I. 6, 7, 8 ; Die. 5, 4 (128, 2).
An unknown king: O. B. I. 118 (129, 3).
B. Gishban :
Ush (74). Gunammide (?) (75, 87 note). Enakalli. Urlumma
(95). Ili{g6). Ukush {\y>). Lugahaggisi {i^o). Becomes 'king
of Erech and of the world.' His inscription : O. B. I. 87 (131). The
time of Lugalzaggisi (11, 144). His nationality. The question of
Sumeriology as such. Hilprecht's view (143). The oldest kings
bear good Semitic names (142, i). Semitic phrases (14s, a), and
xii CONTENTS
PAGES
Semitisms in Sumerian inscriptions (145, 3). Thureau-Dangin's view
(148). Where was the original home of the Semites, and at what
time did they invade Babylonia? (149). Ezuab (150, 4).
V. The First Dynasty of Ur 150-163
Lugalkiguhnidudu (150). Becomes 'lord' (151), and later on
even 'king of Erech' (152). Translations: O. B. I. 86 (151) ; O.B.I.
23i 24, 25 (152, 15). Lugalkisahi, his son. Mentioned on O. B. I.
86, pl- 37 (152); O. B. 1.89(153,6).
VI. The Patesis of Shirpurla between Lummadur and
Ur-Ba'u 153-154
Lugalanda. R. A. iv. No. 3, pi. iii. No. 9 (16). LugcUushumgal.
His inscriptions (153, i). His son (?) UR-E (20), both being con-
temporaries of Sargon I. and Naram-Sin (see p. 7, and sub ' kings
of Agade '). A nam-fatesi of Ur is mentioned at this time. Was it
Ur-^ingir) Utu (^) who held the patesiate of Ur? (154).
VII. Kings of Agade 1 54-175
Sharganishardli, the son of Itti-BH (154). The legend (155).
Tablet of Omens (156). The historicity of the Tablet of Omens
proved by inscriptions of SharganisharSli and Naram-Sin : victory
over Elam (158 a) ; over the West-land (159 b') ; over Gntim (159 c) ;
over Erech and .... su-ki (160 d). Other dates of Sargon I. and
Naram-Sin (160, 3). Cities mentioned in the inscriptions (161).
Lugalushumgal, patesi of Shirptarla, their contemporary (Jr, 163).
The extent of Sargon I.'s and Naram-Sin's dominion (162). Titles of
the two kings respectively (163). Sar kibrat arbdi, lugal-kalamma,
lugal an-ub-da tab-tab-ba, iar kifsati (165). Sargon I. and Naram-
Sin as administrators (164). The sign ilu before their names (164).
The Nimrod-Epos (166). The tree of life (167). Inscriptions of
Sargon I. translated : R. A. iv. p. 8 (7) ; R. A. iv. p. 3 (. . . ne-su-
in-ta) (154, note 2); Hommel, Geschichte, p. 302 (^Ib-nWiarri)
(155 note) ; R. A. iv. No. Iii. pi. vi. No. 16 (158 a) ; ibid. pi. vi.
No. 17 (1596); ibid. pi. V. No. 15 (159 c); ibid. No. 13 (160);
Compt. Rend. 1896 (Reprint), p. 10, No. 4 (160 rf) ; R. A. iv. No. iii.
pi. V. No. 14; ibid. pi. vi. No. 18 (160, 3); O. B. I. i (167);
O. B. I. 2 (169) J O. B. I. 3 (161).
Naram-Sin, son of Sargon I. (170). Translations: R. A. iv.
p. II (7); ibid. No. iii. pi. vi. No. 19 (160, 3) ; Comptes Rendus,
'899. P- 348, pl. I (162) ; R. A. iv. No. iii. pi. vii. Nos. 22, 23, 26
(165) ; Rec. Trav. xix. p. 187 (166) ; O. B. I. 120 (171) ; D^c. 44,
fig. I, and 0. B, I. 4 (171 note).
CONTENTS xiii
PAGES
Binganishar&li, son of Naram-Sin (173). Hommel, Gesch. p. 299
(173); Comptes Rendus, 1897, p. 190 (173, i). Nabe-?-7nash,
patesi of Tutu, brother of Binganishar&li (173). Lipush-Iaum,
daughter of Nabe-?-mash (173). Comptes Rend. 1899, p. 348,
Pl- I (173)-
VIII. The Kings of Guti and Lulubi . . . 175-180
Lasirab, king of Guti (175). His inscription: Z. A. iv. p. 406
(175)- Ana-BdninijVxag o{'La\ahi{i'j6). His inscription : Rec.
Trav. xiv. pp. 100-106 (177). The Semitic dynasties in Babylonia
(178). The invasion of the Semites (179). Language of the Semites
and Sumerians (179).
IX. The so-called later Patesis of Shirpurla . 18 1-2 15
On whom were these later patesis dependent? (181). Ur-Sa'u.
Translations: T>6c. 27, 2 (182); D^c. 37, i, 2 (183); ibid. 38, 2;
E. A. H. 112, 113 (185). Nammagni (185), Ur-Ba'u's son-in-law
(186). Translations: R. A. ii. p. 79 (19); C. T. 96-6-15, i (186).
Names of statues, &c. (187, 12). Namma^ni's successors (187).
Gudea. Gudea's dream (189). His buildings (191). Extent of
realm (192). His wars. Translations : Dec. 25"'"^ i f, (191) ;
P. S. B. A. 1890, p. 63, No. ii; D^c. 37, 4; E. A. H. 114,115(194);
Ddc. 38, I, 3, 6; 29, I (195); D^c. 26, 2; 44, 2 (196). Statues of
Gudea (196). Statue A (197). Statue C (199). Statue E (202).
Statue H (209). Ur-Ningirsu, son of Gudea (210). Ur-Ninsun
(211). His inscription : R. A. ii. 79 (21). {Ga)lukani I. How
many patesis, (Ga)lukani by name, are known? He is dependent
on Dungi I. (212). His inscription: D6c. 21, 4 (21). History of
Shirpurla recapitulated (212). Meaning of the \S.i\ssi lugal-kalamma
(214), lugal an-uh-da tab-tab-ba ()ar kibrat arbdi), "iar kiViati (215).
X. The Second Dynasty of Ur .... 215-225
Meaning of the title lugal Ki-en-gi-ki-Urdu (216). Why did the
kings adopt that title? (218). Pognon's, Winckler's, and Lehmann's
views with regard to the meaning of the title (221). Ur- Gur. Transla-
tions: O. B.I. 121 ; 122 ; 14 (222). Z>«»^j /,,son of Ur-Gur (223).
His buildings. Translations: O. B. I. 16; 123; C. T. 7287 = A. F.
p. 547. 8 ("4)-
XI. Kings of Erech 225-228
Singdshid a.n& his inscriptions (225). Sing&mil (226). AN-A-
AN-Gii-dub-ba. m-ma, O. B. I. 26 (226, 2). Bil-Gur (227).
xiV CONTENTS
XII. Kings of Isin 228-234
la-lu-un-a-'iar, R. T. xix. p. 48 (229). Libit-Anunit and his .
inscriptions (229, i). li-bi-gir-ra. Ur-Ninib and his inscriptions
(230). Translation of O. B. I. 18. Bur-Sin IT. Translation of
O. B. I. 19 (231). Idtn-Dagan. His inscription, R. T. xvi. p. 187,
translated (232). Ishme-Dagan (233).
XIII. The Third Dynasty of Ur . . . . 234-237
Gungunu (25, 234). Enannatum, son of Ishme-Dagan. Ur-
Gur II. (?). Dungi II. (235). Translations : O. B. I. 15 (336) ;
R. A. iv. p. 90 (22) ; U. A. G. p. 157, 9 (37).
XIV. The Fourth Dynasty of Ur . . . . 238-287
Are Dungi I., II., and III. one and the same person ? Winckler's
theory (238-249). Dungi III. (249). Translations : R. T. xviii.
p. 73(250); A. B.K. 37(251); E. A. H. 61 (251); C.T. 17288
(252). Dates of Dungi III. O. B. I. 125 (254, 6 ff.). Dates of
Bur-Sin II. (266). Translations : O. B. I. 127 (266, I ff.) ; R. T.
XX. p. 67 (269, II) ; 0. B. I. 20 (270) ; O. B. I. 21 (271) ; E. A. H.
26 = C. T. 12156 (273) ; R. A. iv. pi. xxxi. No. 80 (240, i). Ur-
Bdu II. (274). R. T. xix. p. 49. Dates of Gimil-Sin (275).
O. B. I. 127 (276) ; Peters, Nippnr, ii. p. 239 (277) ; R. A. iv.
pi. xxxi. No. 81 (240, i). R. T. xix. p. 186 (315). Dates of Ine-
Sin (278). R. A. iv. pi. xxxi. No. 82 (240, i). Uncertain Dates
(279). Progress of history from Ur IV. till the time of l^ammu-
rabi (282).
XV. The Names of the Months .... 287-307
The months at the time of Sargon I and of Ur IV. (287). The
Canaanitish months (289). E. A. H. 134 (291) ; v. R. 43 (294).
Of how many days consisted a year ? (303). The intercalary months.
The days of a month (306). Comparative table of the names of the
months.
XVI. The sign of ' god' before certain Proper Names 307-317
XVII. APPENDIX : The E. A. Hoffman Collection of
Babylonian Clay-tablets 319-434
General survey (321). The mu-gub zig-ga tablets (333). Other
tablets, similar to the preceding (366). Accounts of wool (384).
Officials (409). Fatesis of Ashnnnna (433).
XVIII. INDICES 435-452
List of Proper Names (435). List of gods (442). Buildings (446).
Cities and lands (448).
CONTENTS
XV
The following tablets of the
translated : —
PAGES
E.A.H. 14 . 265, 50 a 1333 ff., 354
19 . . . 265,50*; 333 ff., 356
a6 (Bur-Sin II.) 273
27 • 266, I ; 423
33. 34 266, 2 ; 366 ff.
33 372
34 376
35, 37 • • . • 266, 3 ; 333 ff.
36 358
37 360
47-49 .... 266, 3 J 384 ff.
47 386
48 388
49 390
50.51,53,54 .... 266,3
50
51
53
54
56
267,4
394
396
398
426
399
E. A. H. Collection have been
PAGES
E. A. H. 61 . . . . 251 ; 267, 4
87 269,9; 421
96, 109 416
96 260, 34 a; 418
100, 102 430
100 261, 41 ; 431
432
362
428
404
.327
109 280, 4 ; 420
no, III. Ur-Ningishzidda . 433
112, 113. Ur-Ba'u .... 185
114, 115. Giidea .... 194
121 380
122 384 ff.; 392
134. Months 299
152 . . 407
102
104
106
107
io8
Transcriptions and translations of inscriptions to be found in
E. de Sarzec, DAouvertes .en Chalde'e (D^c).
Dec. 2, I. Ur-Nind . .
a"', 2.
12;
", 5(=R. A.
IV. p
No. 2). Eannatnm
3 A.
3"", D'.
4 A.
4"", d' (Gimammide?)
4*«r, f' Eannatum .
4'"", F'. „ 77;
5, I. Urnlcagina
5, 2, Entemena . .
• 59, 16
59, 16; 68
. . 66
. . 66
59,16; 61
. . 58
122,
87, note
76, 77, 80
. . 78
71, i; 82,3
71,1
■ 87
82, 2, 4
80 ; 80 note
• 51
. 116
Dec. 5, 3. Ezuab . . . . 150,4
5, 4. Alnsharshid . , . 128, 2
S'l', ia( = R. A. ii. 148, 149).
Entemena iii
5"', 2. Dudu 117
6, 4. Enannatum II. . . . 13
9. Statue D of Gudea . 60, note
ioandi3, 1. Statue C of Gudea 199
II and 13, 2. „ E „ . 202
13,4. Statue H of Gudea . 209
16 ff. ,, B „ 136, 32 ;
197:410
2oandi5,5. Statue A of Gudea 197
21, 4. Gala-Lama .... 21
25'''', I b. Gudea .... 191
26, 2 196
27, 2. Ur-Ba'u 182
CONTENTS
PAGES
Dec, 37, I, 2. Ui-Ba'u ... 183
37, 3, 4- Gudea 193
37, 8. Ur-Ningirsu en idingir)
Mnd 37, 1
37, 10. Nammagni . . . 185, i
38, I, 3, 6. Gudea .... 195
38, 2. Ur-Ba'u 183
43i 43'"'- Vase d'argent of
Entemena 116
44, I. Naram-Sin . . 171, note
44, 2. Gudea . . . . 196
PAGES
Dec. 27, 3 (= E. A. H. 114,
115). Gudea 194
29, 1 ( = A. B. K. p. 4, No. 9).
Gudea 195
29, 4. DuDgi 1 224, 4
31, I (=R. A. iv. p. 91). Ur-
Nina 64
31, 2 a, b. Eannatum ... 93
31, 3( = R.A.ii.87) Entemena 13;
104, 21
32. Barrel-Cylinder of Uru-
kagina 53
Transcriptions and translations of inscriptions to be found in H. V.
Hilprecht, Old Babylonian Inscriptions, chiefly from Nippur
(O. B. I.).
No. I. Sargon 1 167
2- ,. 169
3- „ i6i
4. Naram-Sin . . . 171, note
5. Alusharshid 128
6-8. „ .... 128,2
14. Ur-Gur 222
15. Dungi II 236
16. Dungi 1 224
18. Ur-Ninib . . ... 230
19. Bur-Sin 1 231
20. Bur-Sin 11. . . . . . 270
21. „ 271
23,24,25. Lugalkigubnidudu
152. 15
26. Iluma 226, 2
43. Kurigalzu 236
49. „ ... 208, ix. 2
61, Kaddishman-Turgu {sic)
208, ix. 2
63. Kadashman-Turgu . 161, i ;
169, 24
86, pi. 36. Lugalkigubnidudu 151
86, pi. 37- „ and
Lugalkisalsi 152
87. Lugalzaggisi .... 131
89. Lugalkisalsi . . . 153, 6
No. 90-92. Enshagkushanna . 45
93. Urzaguddu .... 125, I
94. Ur-Enlil . 30, i ; 44. 4 ; 410
95. Ur-Mama
96, 97. Ur-Enlil .
102. Enne-Ugun
103, 104. „
105-
108, 109. Udug-?
no. Enne-Ugun
HI. Lngalshir(ge ?)
112. dumu Adda-ge
30, i;
55.2;
410
30, I
. J24
. 123
. 124
121, 1
. . 124
89, 22
• 89, 22 ;
"4. V. 5
"3 114.V. 5
115. Entemena 118
"6,117. ,: 119
118. Unknown king of Kish 129,3
119. Unknown (!) king of
Agade .... 154, 2
120. Naram-Sin 171
121. 122. Ur-Gur .... 222
123. Dungi 1 224
124 27; 333 ff.; 366
125. Dates of Dungi III. 254,61!.
126. . . . 267, 5; 333 ff.; 412
127. Dates of Bur-Sin IL and . ^
Gimil-Sin . . 27 ; 266 ff.
CONTENTS
Transcriptions and translations of inscriptions to be found in C. T.
PAGES
96-6-12, 3 ( = R. T. xxi. 125).
(Ga)tu- idingir) Utu 30, I ;
300, 111.
96-6-15, I. Nammagni (Nin-
kagina) 186
7287( = A.F.p.547,8). Dungi 224
12033. Bazi ..... 30, I
12061 ( = A. B. K. No. 4).
Entemena 117
PAGES
1 2146. Kiag oi Ma-ttru-^i 30,1
12155. Lugaltarsi . . . 125, 3
I2I56( = E. A. H. 26). Bur-
Sin II 273
12217. {Ga)lu-ltgir-e (T)\mgi)
237, i.
17288 ( = A. F. vi. p. 647, 7).
Dungi III 252
23580. Eannatum . . . . 8i,i.
(For the subscriptions to be found on certain tablets of this publication, see
among other places also pp. 74, i ; 245 ; 246 ; Notes to dates of Dungi III.,
Bur-Sin II., Gimil-Sin, Ine-Sin, Uncertain dates, pp. 252-281 ; 288, i, and
315. !•)
Transcriptions and translations of inscriptions to be found in Revue
d' Assyriologie et d' Arche'ologie Orientate (R. A.).
R. A. iv. p. 142. (Dates). . 27
iv. No. i. pi. i. Galet A of
Eannatum 12 ; 83
iv. No. ii. pi. ii. Cone of
Entemena 97
iv. No. iii. pi. iii. No. 9. Lii-
galanda . . .... 16
iv. No. iii. pi. V. No. 14.
Sargon 1 160, 3
iv. No. iii. pi. vi. No. 13.
Sargon 1 160
iv. No. iii. pi. vi. No. 15.
Sargon I. or Naram-Sin . 159
Ibid. No. 16. Sargon I. . . ' 158
Ibid. No. 17. „ . . 159
Ibid. Nos. 18, I9(=R. A. iv.
p. 22).. Naram-Sin . . 160, 3
iv. No. iii. pi. vii. Nos. 22, 23,
26. Naram-Sin . . . . 165
Ibid. pi. ix. No. 31. Patesi
of Ur . . 20, 3; 154; 249, 1
Ibid. pi. xxxi. Nos. 80 (Bur-
Sin II.), 81 (Gimil-Sin),
82 (Ine-Sin) .... 240, 1
. A. ii. p. 79. nin Kandu
rg
ii. p. 79. Ur-Ninsun . . .
21
ii. pp. 87 (= Dec. 31,3). En-
temena
13
ii. pp. 148, 149 (= D^c. sti',
I a). Entemena ....
112
iii. p. 31. Enannatum I. . .
14
iii. p. 55 and No. ii. pi. iii.
( = R.A. iv. p. 35). Mesilim
16;
143
144
'"• P- 144
278
iv. p. 3. Sargon I. . . . 1
54. 2
IV
P-
3-
Sargon I. .
. . 154.2
IV
P-
8.
J'
• 7 ; 154. 2
IV
P-
II.
Naram-Sin
7; 171, note
iv
P
22
j»
. 160, 3
iv
P-
35 (
= i"-P-S5)-
Mesilim 16 ;
143; 144
IV
P-
90.
Dungi II.
(Ga)lu-
kani II
p. 91.
. . . 22
iv
Ur-Nina .
... 64
IV
P
105
b „ ■
. ■ 59. '6
IV.
P-
106,
11 „
... 65
iv
P
III
Lugalda
f-ak? 121,2
iv
P-
122
I. Ur-NinS . . 64
iv
P-
122,
2 ( = Dec.
2"", 5)-
Eannatum . . .
... 87
CONTENTS
Inscriptions to be found in Recueil de Travaux relaiifs a la
Philologie ei a T ArchMogie Egyptiennes et Assyriennes (R. T.),
cited in this book.
PAGES
R. T.
xiv. p.
[ooff. Anu-BSnini
177
xvi.
p. 187
IdJn-Dagan
. .
232
xviii. p. 64
ff. . . 244;
247
312
xviii. p. 73
Lugal-as(?)-tur-ri
250
xviii. p. 74
Utua 211 ;
238
243
xix.
p. 48.
Libit- Anunit
229
xix.
p. 49.
Ur-Ba'u II.
.
274
xix.
P-5°.
9. Allamu
. 212, I
xix.
P- 59.
No. 338. Date of
Bur-Sin II. ...
. 270,12
PAGES
R. T. xix. p. 61 281
xix. p. 63. Ur-Nesu. iii;30o, iii.
xix. p. 186. Gitnil-Sin . . 315
xix. p. 187. Naram-Sin . . 166
XX. p. 67. Bur-Sin II. . 269,11
xxi. p. 125 ( = C. T. 96-9-
13, 3) {Ga)lu-'dingir) Utu 30, I ;
300, iii.
Inscriptions to be found in Comptes Rendus des Stances de I'Acad/mie
des Inscriptions et Belles-lettres (Comptes Rendus).
Comptes Rendus, 1896 (Reprint),
p. 10, No. 4 . . . . 160, d
1897, p. 190. Binganisharaii 173, i
vol. iv. 25, p. 424. Lum-
madur , . . . It, i
Comptes Rendus, 1899, p. 348,
pi. i. Naram-Sin . . .
Ibid. Lipush-Iaum . . .
Ibid. pi. li. Enannatum I. .
162
173
72
Inscriptions lo be found in H. C. Rawlinson, Cuneiform Inscriptions
of Western Asia, vols. i.-v. (R.).
■ii. R. 49, I, cols. I, 2, 11. 7 (T.
Months 292, I
iii. R. 4, No. 7. Legend of
Sargon I ijj
iv. R'. 34. Omina of Sargon I.
• 18; 157
• 294
i. R. I, I. No. 10, HmhJjamir 30, I ;
i. R. 2, No. vi. I. Gungunu . 25
i. R. 36, No. 2. Enannatum,
son of Ishme-Dagan . . 25
i. R.68, No. i,vol. i. I2ff. Ur-
Gur .... , . . 34
and Naram-Sin
V. R. 43. Months
Inscriptions to be found in other publications.
{a) A. B. K.:
No. 9 (= D^c. 29, i), Gudea 195
No. 10 (=E. A. H. 114,
115), Gudea 194
No. 16 (=U. A. G. p. 156,
No. 7). Mutabil 30, i ; 255, 12
No. 35. Subscription . . 312, 4
No. 37. Dungi III. . . 251
No. 65 ( = Hommel, Ge-
schichte, p. 302). Ibni-
sharri 155, note
Qi) U. A. G. :
P. 156, No. 7( = A. B. K. No.
16). Mutabil. 30, i; 255, 12
P. 157, No. 8. Ip-ia-^dingir)
Innanna-Erin-ki . . . 30, 1
P. 157, No. 9. Ur-Ningirsu en
'dingir) /\/ind 37
CONTENTS
XIX
PAGES
W A. F. :
P. 545. 3- • • ■ 'i patesi of
. . . mu-tuk . . . ki . . . 30, I
P. 645,4 (=C. T. 12033!).
[Ba]-zi king of Al . . . 30, i
P. 547. 7(=C. T. 17288).
Dnngi III 252
P. 547, 8 (=C. T. 7287).
Dungi 1 224
(rf) Hommel, Geschichte Baby-
loniens und Assyriens :
P. 290. IHy^-mh-i-lum, patesi
oi Dun-til-ki-la . . . . 30, i
P. 293. . . . da, patesi of 52V-
iar-ki 30, I
P. 299. BinganisharSli . . 173
P. 302 ( = A. B. K. No. 65).
Ibni-sharri . . . 155, note
P. 308. Apil-Ishtar (?) 171, note
P. 334. Ur-'-dingiy) AN-
MA6 and Lugal-kal-la,
patesis of Nippur. 30, i ; 223
if) P. S. B. A. :
1890, p. 63, No. i. Alzuzua 82, 4
PAGES
1890, p. 63, No. ii. Gudea. 193
(/) Le Clercq t
i. pi. V. No. 461 (=A. B. K.
65). Ibni-sharri . . 155, note
ii. pl.Tiii. No. I. Urnkagina 48
ii. pi. X. No. 6. Urlumma 95, i
(J) Z. A. :
iv. p. 406. Lasirab . . . 175
xii. p. 267 423
[K) M^nant, Glypt. orient.
i. p. 104. Bilgur . . . 227
it) Constantinople 622. Dates
of Dungi III. and Bur-
Sin II 253
(Ji) Abel und Winckler, Keil-
schrifttexte, p. 40, col. ii
46 ff. NabCi-na'id . .
(/) Peters, Nippur, ii. p. 239.
Gimil-Sin 277
(ni) Miis^on, 1892, p. 253, Nos.
i-iv. Patesis of Ashnunna 433 ;
434
SOME ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THE TEXT
A. B. K. = Hugo Winckler : Altbabylonische Keilscbrifttexte.
A. B. P. R. = Bruno Meissner : Beitrage zum Altbabylonischen Privatrecht.
A. F. = Hugo Winckler ; Altorientalische Forschungen.
A. L'. = Friedr. Delitzsch: Assyriscbe Lesestiicke ; 3rd edition.
B. A. = Fr. Delitzsch und P. Haupt: Beitrage zur Assyriologie.
B. O. R. = Babylonian Oriental Records.
Br. = R. E. Brunnow: A Classified List of all . . . Cuneiform Ideographs.
C. T. = Cuneiform Texts from Babylonian Tablets, Sec, in the British Mnseum,
Parts i-viii.
Dec. = E. DE Sarzec : Decouvertes en Chaldee.
E. A. H. = E. A. Hoffman Collection.
E. C. = F. Thureau-Dangin: Recherches sur I'Origine de I'Ecriture Cun^i-
forme.
E. S. = Fr. Delitzsch ; Entstehung des Altbabylonischen Schriftsystems.
H. W. B. = Fr. Delitzsch: Assyrisches Handworterbuch.
J. A. O. S. = Journal of the American Oriental Society.
K. B. = Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek.
O. B. I. =H. V. HiLPRECHT: Old Babylonian Inscriptions, chiefly from
Nippur.
O. L. Z. = Orientalische Litteratur-Zeitung.
P. S. B. A. = Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archaeology.
R. = Rawlinson : Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia.
R. A. = Revue d'Assyriologie et d' Arch^ologie Orientate.
R. P. = Records of the Past.
R. R. B. L. = H. V. HiLPRECHT : Recent Research in Bible Lands.
R. S. = Revue Semitique d'^pigraphie et d'Histoire Ancienne.
R. T. = Recueil de Travaux relatifs k la Philologie et k I'Arch^ologie £gyp-
tiennes et Assyriennes.
S. L. = Fr. Hommel : Sumerische Lesestiicke.
T. C. = A. Amiaud et L. MicHiNEAU : Tableau Compart des ecritnres
Babylonienne et Assyrienne.
U. A. G. = H. Winckler: Untersuchungen zur Altorientalischen Geschichte.
Z. A. = Zeitschrift fiir Assyriologie.
Z. D. M. G. = Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenlandischen Gesellschaft.
Z. K. = Zeitschrift fiir Keilschriftforschung.
(All the other abbreviations used are self-evident.)
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
Der ist kein Mensch, noch gar ein gelehrter Mann,
Wer die Geschichtsdaten nicht auswendig kann ;
Dock wer von der Vorzeit kann Kunde geben,
Fiigt neues Leben zttm eigenen Leben.
No nation can look back upon such a long time of recorded
history as can the Ancient Babylonians. Recent excavations have
brought to light tablets, which show us that in the land between
the Tigris and the Euphrates there existed a highly civilized
nation as early as 5000 b.c, a nation which had its own lan-
guage and its own system of signs in which to express it. This
fact alone would make the study of old Babylonian history full of
interest. The study, however, is not only interesting, but also
of great historical moment. We are informed by the Bible that
Abraham, the ancestor of the Jewish race, came from Ur of the
Chaldees. If we want to follow up the history of Abraham and
his ancestors we are at once thrown into contact with Old Babylonia.
Abraham, according to Archbishop Usher's chronology, lived at about
1 900 B. c. At this time Babylonia had long outgrown its infancy.
Amraphel, king of Shinar (the Babylonian Hammurabi), does
, not merely claim authority over Babylon, but he bears the proud
2 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
title ' king of the four corners of the world/ thus showing that the
countries north and south, east and west of Babylonia were subject
to him. This Qammurabi records his mighty deeds in inscriptions
written in two different languages. We are therefore led to
conjecture that there must have been two different peoples in the
country, differing from each other in speech. These two languages
vary widely in grammatical construction and arrangement. They
have been called by scholars the ' Sumerian ' and the ' Semitic-
Babylonian ' languages respectively. An examination of them
shows that the Sumerian was the original one in Old Babylonia.
The Sumerians must consequently have been the people who
invented this system of writing, called the ' Cuneiform Script.' If
this is so — and it can hardly be denied — it would follow that there
must have been a time when the Sumerians were the sole possessors
of Babylonia. And if the Sumerians were the originators of this
system of cuneiform writing and the original inhabitants of Baby-
lonia, the question arises, when did the ' barbarians,' who adopted
the Sumerian mode of writing in order to express their Semitic
language, invade the country? Whence did they come? Did
they come from the north or from the south ? If they came from
the norlh, where was their original home ? If they, on the contrary,
came from the south, from what part of the south ? These are all
questions difficult to answer. A due consideration, however, will
be given to them, when we come to consider the times of
Lugalzaggisi.
True, it has been maintained by very eminent scholars during
the last twenty years, that we should not look for two distinct
races in Babylonia, but only for one race, using two different modes
of writing, this race being asserted to be the Semitic. But, if we
postulate only one race, using two different ' modes of writing,' how
well educated must the people have been at so early a time as
4000 B.C. to be alle to use two such widely differing 'modes of
writing ' ! That would presuppose a development of at least two
to three thousand years and a civilization which would be without
parallel in the history of mankind.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 3
The most difficult question, however, in this history is that of
its chronology. Here we have almost no basis to stand on ; nay,
we are often at a loss to tell which dynasty of rulers preceded or
followed another dynasty, and even within the dynasties we some-
times do not know which ruler is to be placed first and which last.
And yet, thanks to the excavations made at Telloh and Nippur,
and to the diligence of such scholars as Hilprecht and Thureau-
Dangin, we are now able to bring at least some light into this
darkness.
We know that it is possible to reconstruct the chronology of the
Assyrian empire on the basis of the historical inscriptions which
have been found. If we had similar documents for the period
which we propose to discuss, the task would be a simple one. But
not having this assistance, we must content ourselves with other
means. These are :
1. Incidental references in some particular inscription to a certain
king, who is thus shown to be contemporary with the events
narrated in that inscription.
2. Palaeographic evidence. This latter, however, must only be
employed where the former is wanting.
As soon as some of the cuneiform inscriptions had been deci-
phered and the meaning of the signs established, scholars were able
to verify the results so far obtained by facts derived from other
sources. Thus the principle employed in reading cuneiform
inscriptions was proved to be correct. Among these inscriptions
brought to light were also some tablets which proved to be ' lists
of officers ' and ' lists of kings.' Each officer was appointed for
a particular year, and gave his name to it, like the apx<^''
(nmvvfios of Athens. Hence this official list was called by George
Smith 'The Eponym Canon'; and this title is still retained
by scholars. It was customary for the Assyrian kings to
date their documents by these eponym-years. When they did
so, the expression usually used was : ina Itmi X.X., i. e. ' in
the eponym of a certain officer,' or ' when a certain officer was
eponym.' Some documents, however, are arranged according to
4 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
the years of the king's rule, as for example: 'in the first,
second, &c., year of my reign I did a certain thing.' In some cases
both methods were combined. In the Black Obelisk of Shalma-
nassar, e.g., we read: Ina surrat sarrMa, i.e. 'in the be-
ginning of my kingship ' (1. 20) ; then in 1. 26 : ina liten
palia, ' in the first year of my reign ' ; tna lani-e palia, ' in the
second year of my reign' (1. 32); ma lalli palia, 'in the
third year of my reign' (1. 35); but in 1. 45 he does not say
' in the fourth year of my reign,' but ina lim-mu Ddin-Alur,
'in the eponym of Dain-Ashur.* Hence the ep'onym of Dain-
Ashur is identical with the 'fourth year of his reign.' Prob-
ably as many as thirty different officers could be eponyms.
When the list was exhausted the series was recommenced. This
series was headed by the king {larru), then came the tartan
(turtdnu), then the military commander (rab ummandii rapsdti),
then the rab ekal, the 'chief of the palace,' and so on. These
lists of eponyms were kept with the greatest regularity. A new
reign was marked off from the preceding one by a dividing line.
Seven of such canons have been brought to light ; unfortunately
none is complete, but in many cases they confirm and supplement
each other. Some of these canons only give the names of the
different eponyms that followed in an unbroken line; others,
again, are accompanied by brief historical notices of some event
or events which occurred each year. These brief notices, curiously
enough, became the means of reducing the Assyrian chronology
to ' exact terms of our own.' And if we succeed in fixing
precisely the date of one eponym, we can generally fix all
the others which either precede or follow, provided the line is
unbroken.
The remarkable statement which gives us the key to the whole
Assyrian chronology runs thus :
' Pur-Sagale of the land of Gozan. Revolt of the city of Ashur.
In the month Sivan the sun suffered an eclipse.'
This eclipse has been calculated by the celebrated Mr. Hincks
to be that which occurred on June 15, 763 b. c; and this date has
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 5
been generally ' accepted as that of this eponym. Pur-Sagale was
the eighth eponym in the reign of Ashurdanan', king of Assyria ;
consequently Ashurdanan began to reign in the year 771 b. c'
Having now fixed the date of one king, we can, with the help
of the 'list of the kings' and other inscriptions, determine
the date of all the others. In this way we calculate that the
date of Nabfi-na id, king of Babylonia, is 555-539 b. c. This
king mentions in one of his inscriptions ('the great cylinder from.
Abfi-Habba' [Sippar], v. R. 64 ; Abel und Winckler, Keilschrifttexte,
p. 40 ff.) a certain Naram-Sin, the son oi SAR-GE-NA (read in
Assyrian Sarru-kenu). This text is of the greatest historical
importance and reads as follows (col, ii. 46 if.) :
' For Shamash, the judge of heaven and earth, Ebarra, his temple,
which is in Sippar, anc^ which Nebuchadnezzar a former king had
built, and whose old foundation stone he had sought but not found —
that temple he had built, and after forty-five years the walls of that
temple had fallen down. I became frightened and humble, was ter-
rified, and my face became confused. I caused Shainash to go out
from it, making him to dwell in another house. I tore down that
temple ai^d looked for its old foundation stone. Eighteen cubits of
gi-ound I removed *, and the foundation stone of Na-ra-am-^'¥^ Sin,
the son oi SAR-GE-NA, which during 3,200 years no king that
went before me had found, — Shamash . . . showed to me.'
In this inscription Naram-Sin, the son of Shargena, is said to
have lived 3,200 years before Nab(i-na'id. This statement would
put the date of Naram-Sin at 3750 b. c, and that of his father
at about 3800 b. c.''
' Oppert's contention (P. S. B. A. xx. p. 26) that this eclipse in the reign
of Pur-Sagale (he reads this name Ezid-seli-igbi) did not occur on June 15,
763 B.C., but on June 13, 809 B.C., may be of importance for Biblical chrono-
logy, but does not affect our reckoning.
' Oppert, 1. c. p. 25, reads this name Assur-edil-el.
' Comp. K. B. i. p. 211 and p. 206.
' Lit. ; Eighteen cubits of ground I made deep (sc. my digging=^«>i};«.)
" For Lehmann's contention (Zwei Probleme) tl^at we have to read 2,800
instead of 3,200, see belPYf.
6 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
When we compare this statement of Nabfi-na'id with the results
of Babylonian excavations, we find that we actually possess in-
scriptions of Naram-Sin and of a certain Sharganisharali. The
original inscriptions, however, do not shed any light on the state-
ment of Nabfl-na'id, that this Naram-Sin was the son of Sharga-
nisharali, nor do they absolutely prove that this Sharganisharali
is identical with the Shargena of Nabfl-na id. Indeed, the name
. Sharganisharali itself was for a long time a bone of contention
among scholars. Some maintained that this Sharganisharili had
nothing to do with the Shargena of Nabii-n^'id, and they even read
the name Binganishardli (Oppert)^. Others again, anxious to
maintain the identity of Sharganisharali with Shargena, read
Shargani shar ali, taking the shar ali as a title, i. e. ' Shargani the
king of the city ' (Hommel, Gesch.). This, however, is not possible ;
because if such were the case the two elements Shargani and
shar ali would be separated by a dividing line (see O. B.I. p. 17).
Hilprecht has maintained the identity of Sharganisharali with
Shargena for the following reasons : —
1. We find — at least in the last 2,500 years of Babylonian
history — abbreviated forms of the same narnes in use. It is
therefore highly probable that at some future time we may find
the abbreviated form Shargani even on his own monuments.
2. It is natural that the long name of such a famous king and
hero of popular story should be abbreviated, and when it had
ceased to be intelligible, explained after the method of 'folk
etymology,' as Sharru-kSnu, ' the true king.'
True and reasonable as these arguments were, yet they are only
indirect. We should still be justified in doubting the identity of
Sharganisharali with Shargena. But this is no longer possible.
Ldon Heuzey has published in R. A. iv. p. i ff., several
seal-cylinders of Sharganisharali and Naram-Sin. Among these,
two are of special importance; one on p. 8 reads: —
^ ' It was also read Sar-gani-sar-lu^ (Menant) ; Sar{Bin)-ga-ni-'sar-imsi or
Sarihir, bm)-ga-ni-sar-ali (Oppert); Sar-ga-ni-'iar-mahazi (Winckler).
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
Col. I. Sar-ga-ni-lar-dli
da-num
A-ga-de-J''
Col. 2. Lttgal-ulum-gal
pa-ie-si
Sir-pur-la-'''
arad-ka {NITAG-ZU)
The other, on p. ii, reads : —
(''") Na-ra-am-('''')Sm
da-num
ilu A-ga-de-'''
V
sar
ki-ib-ra-iim
ar-ba-tm
Lugal-usum-gal
dup-sar
pa-ie-si
Sir-pur -la-'''
arad-ka (NITAG-ZU)
i. e. Sharganisharali,
the mighty
king
of Agade,
Col. 2. Lugalushumgal,
patesi
of Shirpuria,
(is) thy servant.
i. e. Naram-Sin,
the mighty
god of Agade,
king
of the four corners
of the world,
Lugalushumgal,
the scribe,
patesi
of Shirpuria,
(is) thy servant.
From these inscriptions we see that Lugalushumgal, the patesi
of Shirpuria, lived during the reigns of Sharganishardli and
Naram-Sin, during both of which reigns he was their servant.
Hence it follows that Sharganisharali and Naram-Sin were
successive kings, and therefore, in accordance with the inscription
of Nabft-nd'id, father and son, living at 3800 and 3750 B.C.'
From this point we can now proceed to consider the date of the
other rulers of Babylonia. It is true, for the date of the other
kings we cannot adduce the testimony of so great and trustworthy
' See also below, s.v. 'Kings of Agade,' and compare for the present
Hilprecht, O. B. I. p. 335, and Maspero, Dawn of Civilization, p. 699, note 4 :
' There is at the present,' he says, 'no serious reason to question its accuracy,
at least relatively, except the instinctive repugnance of modern critics to con-
sider as legitimate, dates which carry them back further into the past than they
are accustomed to go.'
8 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
a witness as Nabfi-na'id, but we must fall back upon the argument
derived from the study of ' palaeography '—a precarious argument,
no doubt, but notwithstanding a helpful one.
In order to get a clear view of the palaeographic problems
connected with the earliest inscriptions down to the time of
Ur-Ba'u, we may select some characteristic signs, which most
frequently occur, and which maybe taken to represent their specific
epochs. (Compare the signs given on the opposite page.)
In the inscriptions of this early period we have to distinguish —
1. Between the writing as exhibited in the so-called historical in-
scriptions, in votive tablets, &c. (this writing, no doubt, is in the most
cases artificial ; it is, if we may call it so, a ' Gothic style 'of writing) ;
2. And the writing used in ' everyday life,* to be found on the
' contract-tablets.'
We may use as a basis for our comparison the ' contract-tablets '
of the time of Sargon I., published by Thureau-Dangin in R. A. iv.
No. iii. No. 1 3 ff., and the ' contract-tablets ' of the time of Urukagina
(see column A), published by the same scholar, I.e. Nos. 8-12'.
All these ' contract-tablets ' — those of Sargon I. as well as those
of Urukagina — ' provt'ennenl pour la plupart de Telloh! As far
as I know, no ' contract-tablets ' from the time of Eannatum have
as yet been published. Of this latter ruler we only have historical
inscriptions, which are all written in the ' Gothic style.' In order
therefore to be able to compare the inscriptions of Eannatum with
those of Urukagina, it is necessary — if we wish to have a common
basis of comparison for the inscriptions of both of these rulers — to
use also the 'Gothic' signs of Urukagina (see column B).
With these 'Gothic' signs of Urukagina and Eannatum we can
also compare the 'Gothic' signs as exhibited in the inscriptions
of Enne-Ugun (O.B.I. 103, no, 104, 105, 102), Urzaguddu
(O.B.I. 93), and Lugalzaggisi (O.B.I. 87). The whole table
of comparison I have headed with two signs taken from the
' We have to compare the writing as exhibited on the ' contract-tablets ' of
both of these rnlers, because it is hardly possible to use the ' Gothic style '
of Sargon I as a basis for comparison with the ' Gothic style ' of Urukagina.
I«
V
I
4)
^
••
>t
• •
A
^
A
••
K
N/
Si' J>
^
\iL
2Jii
fcfsyy
In?
^
■^3
1
lU
ita
ly
7?
f^
^
^
?
i^rr
i
«Vr?-
Y ^
lill *
m
m
Of?
/^A>i
I w
Blau.
Before Urnkagina.
Inscriptions on clay
R.A. iv. iii. Nos. i-
O. B. I. Nos.
(90-92), 94, 98,
lOI, III.
Enshagkushanna.
O. B. I. 90-92.
Urukagina.
A. Contracts.
R. A. iv. iii.
Nos. 8-12.
Urukagina.
B. Tablets,
(a) Barrel-Cylinde
{b) Other inscrif
tions.
Eannatum.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 9
Monument Blau\ confessedly the oldest document we possess.
The second line exhibits certain signs taken from ' contract-tablets '
published by Thureau-Dangin in R. A. iv. No. iii. 1-7. This
scholar has himself said th^t these signs are ' signes ayant des
formes particulierement archa'iques.' The next two lines give signs
of O.B.I. Nos. 94, 98, (99''), loi, III, and of O.B.I. 90-92
(Enshagkushanna).
A careful consideration of the signs above given clearly exhibits
the following three great periods :—
(i) From the oldest times down to Urukagina.
(2) From Urukagina to Lugalzaggisi.
(3) From Lugalzaggisi to Ur-Ba'u.
1 . The first period apparently is governed by the peculiar sign
for MU: ' the two pairs of parallel lines found at or near the
middle of the horizontal line cross each other.' At the time of
Urukagina we find, however, that this ' crossing ' is not always the
case. Hence Urukagina belongs to the end of the first, and also
forms the beginning of the second period. It will be noticed that in
the oldest period (line 2) not only the parallel lines near the middle
of the horizontal line cross each other, but also the two lines at the
beginning '. At first these lines at the beginning were shortened, and
later on also those near or at the middle of the horizontal line.
2. The second period is governed by the signs DA and SU.
Notice the development. In the oldest times the ' thumb ' is
'curved' and 'pressed on the fingers.' In the age of Urukagina,
the thumb, although still curved, is removed from the fingers ; at the
• See p. II, n. 3.
■■ I would not class O. B. I. 99 among these inscriptions as Hilprecht does ;
the form for DA shows this clearly. See opposite page.
' Hilprecht's statement (O. B. I. p. 249), therefore, that ' the original picture
for MU is an arroiu . . . whose cane shaft bears the same primitive marks or
symbols of crossed lines as are characteristic of the most ancient form of arrow-
used in the religious ceremonies of the North American Indians,' does not hold
good. Comp. also Delitzsch, Schriftsystem, pp. 34 f., 114-120. Thureau-
Dangin's contention, E. C. p. xiii. n. 2, that this ' crossing ' is due ' au mouve-
ment rapide impHmi au calame' is disproved by the very occurrence of this
MU on stones.
10 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
time of Lugalzaggisi, however, we find that the ' thumb ' is not only
taken away from ' the fingers,' but is sometimes curved zxid sometimes
straight. Lugalzaggisi therefore belongs to the end of the second
period, and forms at the same time the beginning of the third '■■
Hilprecht, speaking about the palaeographic evidence of the
inscription published in O. B. I. 90-92, 94, 98, 99, loi, in, says
(O. B. I. p. 250) : (i) ' Urukagina ^ lived before the ancient kings
of Shirpuria ; ' (2) ' The inscriptions above referred to are older than
Urukagina.' This is true, if we except O. B. I. No. 99. But
when he goes on (p. 254) to say: 'Nos. 86, 87 (i.e. inscrip-
tions of Lugalkigubnidudu and Lugalzaggisi) . . . show all the
characteristic features of the inscriptions of Urukagina, Ur-Nind,
and Eannatum [sic I). But besides they exhibit a number of
palaeographic peculiarities which are altogether absent from the
inscriptions of Telloh, and must be regarded as characteristic
features of an earlier stage of writing. They will be treated in
full at another place,' he overstates the facts. Lugalzaggisi (and
consequently also Lugalkigubnidudu, Hilprecht, O. B. I. p. 271) is
by no means to be placed before Eannatum". Compare for
instance the sign KA, of which Thureau-Dangin says (R. S. 1897,
p. 269): ' Le signe KA prhente ddja la forme syme'trique qu^il
doit garder et dans laquelle il nest plus possible de discerner (ainsi
que dans la forme d'Eanadou et mieux dans celle du Monument
Blaii) le profil humain tourni vers la droite! Compare also the
signs for KUJi, E (not mh or ga, as Hilprecht reads) ; the sign
GUL of Eannatum has still a curved line in front, which curved line
becomes a broken one at the time of Lugalzaggisi. Compare also the
sign LUGAL. In Eannatum's inscriptions it is always written gal
+ {ga)ltt, while in Lugalzaggisi the two elements are joined together.
' This is also the reason why I would refer O. B. I. No. 99 to the end of this
second period, viz. because the 'thumb' is straight, although the sign MC/h^s
the otJ form.
" Heuzey (Comptes Rendus, 1897, 238, 240) and Thureau-Dangin (preface
to E. C. p. xiv, note) put Urukagina after Lummadur. Scheil, R. T. xxi. 125, '
says that Urukagina is a vassal of Manishtusn, king of Kish.
' So already Thureau-Dangin. See R. S. 1897, p. 268ff., where that scholar
came to the same result by a comparison of certain signs.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY II
Hence, there can be no doubt thaf Lugalzaggisi is younger than
Eannatum, and not 'surely older' {stc! Hilprecht, 1. c. p. 258).
Enne-Ugun is older than Lugalzaggisi (comp. the signs oiLUGAL
and E with those of Lugalzag.), but probably (?) younger than
Eannatum (see the sign for KA, which in Enne-Ugun's in-
scription already has the ' symmetric ' form). Whether Urzaguddu
is older than Lugalzaggisi is uncertain, if we try to determine his
date only from 'palaeographic considerations.'
3. The third period, beginning with Lugalzaggisi, is governed
by the peculiarity that original curved lines are broken (comp.
GUV), complete lines are divided (comp. E), the ' thumb ' in DA
and SU\% straightened, the sign for 'king'" no longer exhibits its
original two elements, but they form one sign. KA throughout
has the symmetric form. To this third period Sargon I. belongs.
From these considerations it follows that Sharganisharili ' is
not by any means the earliest king of whom we have inscriptions;
but that he belongs to the third period, which begins with Lugal-
zaggisi. If we claim for each period a space of only 500 years ' —
which is surely not exorbitant — we would come to the great
age of about 5000 b. c. We may safely assert that the difference
of the signs on the Monument Blau^ from those in R. A. iii. 1-7
(comp. second line of signs, opposite p. 8) is so great, that we may
' Hilprecht (in O.B.I, i. p. 19) has come almost to the same result, i.e.
that the early kings of Shirpurla (of whom Eannatum may be called the represen-
tative) antedated Sargon. His argument, however, although right, was pre-
carious at the time when he wrote his statements. It is in substance this ; —
During the excavations at Nippur there was found in the same deep-lying
stratum as the inscriptions of Sargon and Alusharshid, and close by them,
a fragment of an inscription saying that ' Entemena, patesi of Shirpurla,'
presented a vase to B61 at Nippur. From this he concludes — (i) that the
date of the oldest Semitic rulers of Babylonia is approximately the same
as that of the earliest patesis of Shirpurla, i. e. about 3800 B. c. ; (2) that
the kings of Shirpurla were earlier than Sargon I. (or Alusharshid).
^ This supposition is chiefly based upon the number of rulers that make up
each period ; see further below.
^ The 'Monument Blan,' so called from its possessor Dr. Blau, was first
published in the Proceedings of the American Oriental Society, Oct. 1885,
and republished in R. S. 1896, with a translation by Thureau-Dangin.
12 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
add about 500 years more, i. e. 5500 b. c, which would be the
approximate date of the Monument Blau '.
The Chronology of the Kings and Patesis of Shirpurla
(Iiagas).
Having seen that Urukagina, who is called in his inscriptions
'king of Shirpurla,' must have preceded Eannatum (p. 9), who
calls himself ' king ' as well as ' patesi of Shirpurla,' and that this
latter again antedated Ur-Ba'u, another patesi of Shirpurla, it will
be necessary here to treat more specifically of the chronology of
these kings and patesis.
Eannatum calls himself in the 'Galet A,' col. viii. 11. i-'/, the
dumu A-kur-gal i.e. the son of Akurgal,
pa-te-si patesi
Sir-pur-la-''^-ge of Shirpurla ;
pa-gis-Ul-ga-ni his ancestor
£;>-.rf!«^<v jsfin/i is Ur-Nina,
pa-te-si the patesi
$i'r-pur-la-^'-kam pf Shirpurla.
If we compare this statement with the Stble des Vautours, where
he calls himself ' the son of Akurgal, the king of Shirpurla, the son
of Ur-Nind,' it will be evident that the expression pa-gfs-bil-ga-ni
means in this case 'grandfather,' and hence Eannatum is the
grandson of Ur-NinS. Ur-Nind again speaks of himself in D^c.
pi. 2t» No. 2, col. I, 11. 1-5, as follows : — ,
IDmgir) Nind+ UR i. e. Ur-Nina,
lugal the king
Sir-pur-la of Shirpurla,
dumu Gu-ni-du the son of Gunidu,
dumu Gur-sar son of Gursar.
We would get then so far the following genealogy : —
1 To this same period belong also the tablets published in Dec. l*'', No. i"-"" j
Dec. l*", Nos. 5 and e^-i", and a tablet recently acquired by D?an E. A. Hoff-
man, which seems to antedate ?ven the Monument Blau.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 13
Gur-sar
I.
Gu-ni-du
I
Ur-Nind (king)
A-kur-gal (king, patesi)
E-an-na-iUm{a) (king, patesi).
But further, Jensen, K. B. iii '. p. 1 7, translates an inscription of
a so-called Enannatum(a), patesi of Shirpuria, which is published
in D^c. pi. 6, 4, in which inscription we read ;
1. 3. En-an-na-ium{a) i. e. Enannatum(a),
1. 4. pa-te-si'^ patesi
1. 5. Sir-la-pur -''^ of Shirpuria,
1. 10. dumu En-ieme-na the son of Entemena
1. II. pa-te-si patesi
1. 12. Sir-la-pur-''' -ka-ge of Shirpuria.
Also of this Entemena mentioned here we have several in-
scriptions, in one of which he gives his genealogy as follows : —
D^c. 31, 3(R. A. ii. 87):
En-teme-na i. e. Entemena,
pa-te-si the patesi
Sir-la-^'-pur of Shirpuria,
dumu En-an-na-tum{a) the son of Enannatum(a)
pa-te-si the patesi
Col. 2. Sir-la-'''-pur-ka of Shirpuria,
dumu-ka ^ the grandson
ljr:dmgir j^inii of Ur-Nin^
lugal ' the king
Sir-'''-la-pur-ka-ge of Shirpuria.
If we compare this inscription with the preceding, we find that
we have here two persons with the name of Enannatum(a) ; the
' For the meaning of the terms lugal 3.nA patesi, see below.
' We must read thus, not SAG, as Jensen does, K. B. iii ^ p. 75, n. ii. The
sign is clear. It cannot be read SAG, because this latter sign differs con-
siderably from the sign KA.
14
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
one being the son of Entemena (D^c. 6, 4), while the other is the
father of Entemena (D^c. 31, 3). In order to distinguish these
two patesis, we shall call the latter (i. e. Enannatum{a) the father
of Entemena) Enannatum(a) I., the former (i. e. Enannatum(a)
the son of Entemena) Enannatum(a) II. However, one diffi-
culty remains unexplained, viz. the expression dumu-ka. Jensen,
who transcribed the inscription (see note 2, p. 13), read SAG
and translated ' der erslgeborene Sohn ' ; he apparently followed
Heuzey, who translated '^Is ah/.' If these translations be correct,
then Enannatum(a) I. would be the firstborn of Ur-Nind, con-
sequently a brother of Akurgal. That this is not the case, an
inscription of Enannatum(a) I., published by De Sarzec in R. A. iii.
p. 31, clearly proves. There we read :
{dmgir) Nin-gir-su
i. e. To Ningirsu
the hero of Enlil,
Enannatum(a),
patesi
of Shirpurla,
the conqueror of all the lands for
Ningirsu,
the son of Akurgal
the patesi
of Shirpurla.
To Ningirsu
this vase to crush the grain
he has made.
For (the preservation of) his life
to Ningirsu
the Eninnfi
he [has built].
This inscription proves clearly that Enannatum I. was a son of
Akurgal and therefore the brother of Eannatum.
We are now in a position to understand the expression DU-
' For this expression see Eannatam, Galet A.
' The copy gives SUM, the ideogr. for nad&nu.
gud (ii'^S''-') En-lil-ra
En- an-na-ium{a)
pa-te-si
Str-la-'"-pur
kur-gu-zal-zal '
^dingir) Niri^-gir-m
[dumu] A-kur-gal
\j)a-te-'\si
Sir-la-pur-^'-ka-ge
(dingiy) Nin-gir-su-ra
6ur-^e{sic) ^-gaz
mu-na-gim (= epesu)
nam-U-la-ni-ku
\dmgir-^ Nin-gir-\-su\-ra
\_E-7i'Jnnil
mu-[na-ru]
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
15
MU-KA, which Entemena applies to his father Enannatum(a)
(D^c. 31, 3); it apparently means ' the grandson.' Thus, then,
Entemena says he is the son of Enannatum(a), and this 'latter
is the dumu-ka, the 'grandson,' of Ur-NinS. And this Enan-
natum(a) the grandson of Ur-NinS we have already seen to
be the Enannatum(a) the son of Akurgal (R. A. iii. p. 31), the
brother of Eannatum(a). We have thus established, with De Sarzec,
R. A. iii. p. 32, the following genealogy :
Gur-sar
I
Gu-ni-du
Ur-Nind (king)
Akur-gal (king and patesi)
E-an-na-lum{a) En-an-na-tum(a.) I. (patesi)
(king and patesi) |
En-teme-na (patesi)
En-an-na-ium(a) II. (patesi)
Lum-ma-dur^
Above, on page 9, we have seen that the inscriptions of Urukagina
belong not only to the end of the first period of old Babylonian
writing, but also to the beginning of the second, of which second
period the inscriptions of Lugalzaggisi form the end. Each period,
it was argued, comprised about 500 years. If this is true, then
Urukagina must have lived about 500 years before Lugalzaggisi.
Can we maintain this statement — apart from palaeograpbical
evidence — by other considerations ?
Entemena in his 'C6ne historique' (see Thureau-Dangin, R. A. \.\.
p. 42 ff.) mentions a certain Mesilim, king of Kish, who in the
quality of lord paramount fixes the boundaries between the country
of Shirpurla and Gishban ^ (?), signifying this boundary by a statue
which he erects. Fortunately we have an inscription of this very
' Lum-ma-dur \ dumu En-anna-tum \ pa-te-si \ Sir pur-la-ki is mentioned
by Heuzey, Comptes Rendus, vol. iv. 25, p. 424, whose inscription is pre-
served in the Museum of Constantinople.
' The reading of this name is not certain ; probably it should be read Gishuh.
x6 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
Mesilim, king of Kish ; see R. A. iii. No. 2, pi. iii. and p. 55 ; comp.
R. A. iv. p. 35. It reads :
Me-sthm
i. e. Mesilim,
lugal
king
Kfi
of Kish,
sa+ga'^
the high priest (?)
{dingir) JSfin-su
-gir
of Ningirsu,
(dingir) Su-tlilt
-gir
to Ningirsu
mic-gub
has presented it,
Lugal-
Lugalshuggur
sug-gur ^
pa-ie-si
(being) patesi
Str-la-[pur-
HI
of Shirpurla.
Here then we have a new patesi of Shirpurla, viz. Lugalshuggur,
a vassal of Mesilim, king of Kish — which latter is put by Entemena
in his 'C6ne inscription,' col. 2, 6-8, before Eannatum. And
since it is hardly possible to imagine that Ur-NinS, should have
a counter-patesi ruling over the same city as he, we are by necessity
forced to put Lugalshuggur before the time of Ur-Nina. This
argument is also strengthened by the palaeographic evidence;
see Heuzey, R.A. iii. p. 57. In this same period I Would like to
place also another king of Shirpurla, viz. Engegal, mentioned by
Hilprecht in Z. A. xi. p. 330 f., who says that ^ die Ab/assuTig der
Tafel genau genommen sogar nock vor Ur-Nind anzuselzen sei,'
ibid. p. 331. And if we add to this list of kings and patesis of
Shirpurla another patesi who is mentioned in R. A. iv. No. iii. pi. iii.
No. 9 (comp. Thureau-Dangin, ibid. p. 70), as follows :
ud-ba i. e. At that time
UR-E-INNANNA-GE UR-E-INNANNA-GE^
dt-bi-m-kud judged,
Gal-\-(ga)lu-an-da (and) Lugalanda
pa-ie-si-kam being patesi
' So Hilprecht! Possibly it may be read E + RU = 'the builder of the
house of.' 2 Reading doubtful ; see below.
" Thureau-Dangin reads this name UR-E-ninni-CE, ibid.; cp. E. C.No. 294.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
17
and who, according to that scholar's opinion, ' doti sans doute
prendre place parnii les successeurs dEnanadou 11},' we might
be able to fill up the 500 years which were claimed to lie
between Urukagina and Lugalzaggisi, especially if we allow for
every king about twenty years, and for the lacunae which exist
between certain kings some twenty to fifty years ". The succes-
sion of governors during these 500 years would then be :
Kish. Shiipurla. Erech.
Uru-ka-gi-na (king)
O. B. I. 108
En-ge-gal (king)
Me-silim Lugal-iug-gur (patesi)
Lugal-da ?-ak ? , .
• . . {Gur-sar)
• . . {Gu-ni-du)
I
Ur-Nind (king)
A-kur-gal (king and patesi)
_ — ^ _
Al-zu-zu-a E-an-na-tu}n{a) En-an-na-tum{a) I. (patesi)
(king and patesi) |
En-teme-na (patesi)
En-ne-Ugun En-an-na-tum{a) II. (patesi)
Lum-ma-dur (patesi)
Lugalan-da (patesi)
. . . Lugal-mg-gi-si
On p. 9 it was pointed out that the period from Urukagina to
Lugalzaggisi preceded that to which Ur-Ba'u belongs. It remains
■ Compare the DA, which still exhibits the curved thumb, and the sign
for lugal^gal +{ga)lu.
^ This allowance we have to make because from the material on hand we
do not know how many rulers, for instance, may have reigned between Urukagina
and Engegal, and how many between Lummadur and Lugalanda, &c,
' The dots signify lacunae.
l8 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
only to state here, in what succession the various rulers of the
different dynasties may have followed which have to be placed
between Lummadur and Ur-Ba'u.
A good starting-point for doing this is furnished by the inscrip-
tion of SharganisharSli. If we compare the so-called Gothic
inscriptions of this king with those of a certain Alusharshid and
Manishtusu, both kings of Kish, we shall find that they belong
approximately to the same period. If we can trust Hilprecht's^
emendation of a certain omen of Sargon I., published in iv. R". 34,
11. 7-10, we must place Alusharshid and Manishtusu before
Sargon I.
This, however, is a matter of minor importance.
In O. B. I. pi. 36 and 37, are published two fragments of an
inscription belonging to a certain Lugalkigubnidudu and his son (?)
Lugalkisalsi. Hilprecht, speaking of these texts, says (1. c. p. 271) :
' They belong doubtless to the same general period as No. 87
(i. e. the inscriptions of Lugalzaggisi) ; a detailed examination of
their palaeographic peculiarities leads me to place them somewhat
later V Following Hilprecht, we shall place Lugalkigubnidudu
and his son after Lugalzaggisi ^.
' Hilprecht (O. B. I. p. 26) restores that much-mutilated passage as follows : —
' Sar-ge-na 'ia ina SIR an-ni-i KU-hi [*;] B&biluki i-\)ti-']htm-ma eprS ia
tal-la bdbu TU-NA is-su-hu-ma . . . [ina lime ?-'\tu A-ga-deki dlu i-bu-iu-ma
[ UB-DAy^i ium-i-ii im-bu-u . . . [ina lib-'\ii u-h-U-bu.' ' Sargon, who under
this omen brought sorrow upon Kish and Babylon, tore away the earth of . . .
and built a city in the vicinity of (or after the pattern of?) Agade, called its
name " place (city) of the world," and caused the inhabitants of Kish and
Babylon (?) to dwell there.' From this he infers that the dynasty of Kish was
overthrown by Sargon I., and that therefore Alusharshid and Manishtusu are
to be placed before Sargon I. Thureau-Dangin, R. A. iv. 74<thinks that these
kings of Kish are ' Jirobablemeni postSrieurs d JVaram-Sin.'
' So far Hilprecht is undoubtedly correct. He however continues, 'and
to regard it as about contemporary with the inscriptions of the kings of
Shirpurla, especially with those of Edingiranatum (sic).' We have already seen
that the inscriptions of Lugalzaggisi do not antedate Eannatum, but are, on
the contrary, later. And if Lugalzaggisi is later, Lugalkigubnidudu must be
later also.
^ In the Chronological Table given below, I placed Lugalkigubnidudu before
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 19
To the same period may belong also the predecessors of Gudea
and his successors. Hommel, with his natural insight, when writing
about the period of the so-called later patesis of Shirpurla, uttered
these remarkable words, showing that he was undoubtedly right
in his conclusions (Gesch. p. 312): 'In weitem Abstand von ihnen
(i.e. from the older patesis such as Eannatum, see above) stehen
der Kunst- und Schriftentwickelung nach drei spatere Patesi von
Sirgurla Ur-Ba'u, Gudea und dessen Sohn Ur-Ningirsu! And
a little further down : ' Unier dieser jUngeren Gruppe aher . . . klaffi
dock auch selbst wieder eine kletnere Lilcke von gewiss mehreren
Generationen, also unter Umsfanden \00-206 Jahren, naniltch zwischen
dent ersten derselben, Ur-Ba'u, und den ilbrigen, Gude'a und seinem
Oder seinen Nachfolgern' Thanks to the excavation at Telloh
and the industry of the French scholars, we can in a measure fill
up the gaps which exist between the older patesi Lummadur
and the younger Ur-Ba'u, as well as those between Ur-Ba'u and
Gudea.
Heuzey, in R. A. ii. p. 79, published an inscription which reads
(comp. Jensen, K. B. iii^- p. 75) :
^ingir ]!^in\-gir-su i. e. Unto Ningirsu,
gud-lig-ga the mighty hero
(dingir) En-lil-la^T) of Enlil,
lugal-a-ni her king
nam-ti has for the life
Nam-ma^-ni of Nammagni,
pa-te-si patesi
^ir-pur-la-^'-ka-ku of Shirpurla,
nin Kan-du the lady Kandu,
dumu Ur-'-'^'^eir) Ba-u a child of Ur-Ba'u
pa-te-si the patesi
Sargon I. This, however, is very doubtful. I myself would prefer to place
this king before Ur-Ba'u, but after Sargon I. ; thus making a closer connection
between the first and second dynasty of Ur. The palaeographic evidence seems
to tell more for this latter than for the former arrangement.
20 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
^ir-pur-laJ^-ka of Shirpurla,
dam-ni his wife
lb. nam-ti-la-ni-ku also for her life
a-mu-na-\iub~\ presented (this object).
Here then we meet with a certain lady Kandu', who is the child
(daughter) of Ur-Ba'u, but also the wife of Nammagni, a patesi
of Shirpurla. This Nammagni consequently must— if he could
marry a daughter of Ur-Ba'u— have ruled either immediately or
not very long after Ur-Ba'u. Thus the gap of 'several generations'
between Ur-Ba'u and Gudea is somewhat diminished (comp. above,
p. 19).
We are now also in a position to fill up somewhat the ' weiten
Abstand' (p. 19) between Lummadur, the last of the older
patesis of Shirpurla, and Ur-Ba'u. Above, on p. 16, we saw that
a certain Lugalanda '^ must be placed after successors of Lumma-
dur. And on page 7 ff. we heard of a certain Lugalushumgal,
patesi of Shirpurla, a contemporary both of Sargon I. and
Naram-Sin. This latter patesi must undoubtedly, since he is
a contemporary of Sargon I., be placed before Ur-Ba'u. But
further, in R. A. iv. No. iii. pi. ix. No. 31, Thureau-Dangin has
published a tablet, on the revers of which a certain UR-E, patesi
of Shirpurla, is mentioned. It is possible that we have here,
as Thureau-Dangin has pointed out, 1. c. p. 78, a certain UR-E
who followed his father (?), Lugalushumgal, as patesi of Shirpurla '.
If that be true then this UR-E must be put before Ur-Ba'u.
Hence Hommel's statement above, p. 19, has proved itself to be
correct. To the line of the younger patesis of Shirpurla, and after
Ur-Ningirsu, the son of Gudea (K. B. iii\ p. 67 a, col. i, 8),
' So I would like to read with Heuzey. Jensen takes Ninkandu as the proper
name of the wife of Nammagni.
" Although Lugalanda does not belong to this period I mention him here in
order to show that Hommel was correct in claiming such a great interval between
the older and younger patesis of Shirpurla.
' This Ur-E also must have been a contemporary of a ' patesi of Ur,' men-
tioned on the same tablet, Ur-('l'>'pr) Ulu (!) by name.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
21
have to be added also the two following, of which Hommel, at
the time of writing his history, was not aware, viz. Ur-Ninsun and
Gala-Lama.
The portion of the inscription of Ur-Ninsun (published in R. A.
ii. 79 ; comp. Oppert, ibidem, and Jensen, K. B. iii '- p. 77), so far
as we are concerned with it here, reads :
(DiK^ir) JSfin-gir-su
gud-lig-ga
(dingir) En-lil-la{pj-ra
lugal-a-ni
Ur-('''»sr'r) Nin-sun
pa-ie-si
St'r-pur-la-'''-ge
nam-ii-la-ni-ku
a-mu-na-^uh
i.e. To Ningirsu,
the mighty hero
of Enlil,
his king,
Ur-Ninsun,
patesi
of Shirpurla, for his
life
has presented it.
The inscription of Gala-Lama (D^c. pi. 21, No. 4, and Jensen,
1. c. p. 70) reads :
Column L
\Am\ Sir-[pur-la-^'\-ra i. e. To the mother of Shirpurla,
^dingir'^ Ba-u viz. to Ba'u
\nin-(i\-m his mistress,
\nam-'\ti for the life
^ingir I)ti\n-gi of Dungi,
\lugal l(]g-ga the mighty king.
Column II.
hgal Uru-um-^'-ma
lugal Ki-en-gi-^'-Urdu-ka-ku
Ga-la-^'''''eir) Lama
dumu (Ga)lu-ka-ni
pa-ie-si
Sir-pur-la-''^-ka-ge
the king of Ur,
king of Shumer and Akkad,
Gala-Lama,
the son of (Ga)lukani,
the patesi
of Shirpurla.
22 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
This inscription clearly proves that :
(i) (Ga)lukani must have been the last patesi of Shirpurla, for his
son Gala-Lama does not call himself patesi of Shirpurla.
(2) That the immediate successors of the patesis of Shirpurla were
the kings of Ur, to which Dungi belongs ; hence the dynasty of the
later patesis of Shirpurla was overthrown by these kings of Ur, who
apparently were partly their contemporaries.
(3) That Ur-Ninsun has to be placed before (Ga)lukani, and not,
as Jensen (K. B. iii '• p. 77) does, ' nach der Inschrift Gala-Lama s.^
Of quite another (Ga)lukani, who also confesses his dependence
upon a certain Dungi, king of Ur, we hear in an inscription recently
published by Heuzey in R. A. iv. p. 90, which reads ' :
(dingir) Nin-gir-su To Ningirsu,
g-i^-lig-^a the mighty hero
(dingir) [En-tyi-laiJ) of Bgl,
lugal-a-ni his king,
navi-ii for the life
Dun-gi of Dungi,
nitag lig-ga the strong hero,
lugal Uru-um-^'-ma-ka-ku the king of Ur,
{Ga)Iu-ka-ni (Ga)Iukani,
pa-te-si the patesi
[Sir-pur-la-''i-ge] of Shirpurla,
[a-mu-na-sub'] has presented it.
This tablet is important in more than one respect. It not only
shows that we have to distinguish between Dungi, ' king of Ur,
king of Shumer and Akkad,' and Dungi, ' king of Ur,' but also
between (Ga)lukani the father of Gala-Lama, and (Ga)lukani a con-
temporary of Dungi, ' king of Ur.' The former Dungi we call
Dungi I. ^ and the latter Dungi II.
This latter inscription, therefore, does not belong to our second
' Winckler's and Lehmann's view, that Dungi I. was a contemporary of
Ur-Ningirsu and Gudea, is erroneous. See below.
" Notice the difference in the titles of Dungi ; and see p. 37, note 2, and sub
' Fourth dynasty of Ur.'
E-zu-ab
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 23
period, viz. to that from Lugalzaggisi down to Ur-Ba'u and his suc-
cessors. If we try to arrange this period according to the chronology
above indicated, and allow for the different ' gaps ' which exist be-
tween certain rulers about twenty to fifty years, we shall see that this
period may very well cover a space of about 800 years (500 years to
the time of Ur-Ba'u and 300 years from Ur-Ba'u to Gala-Lama).
Erech. Ur. Kish. Agade. Shirpurla.
Lugal-zag-gi-si
Lugal-ki-gub-ni-du-du
I
Lugal-kisal-si
. . . Ur-zag-ud-du
Lugal-tar-si
O.B.I. 118
Ma-an-ii-tu-su
Alu-usariid
. . . . , , Sargon I. Lugal-tCium-gal
Ur.(.dme!y) Utu (?) SSoo B.C. |
(patesi) ., I _. ^""^
"^ Naram-Sm . . .
3750 B.C. . . .
Bingani-iar-Ali . . .
(comp. R. A. Ur-Ba'u
iv. p. 76) I
Nam-mag-ni
Gu-de-a
I
Ur-Nin-gir-su
Ur-Nin-sun
{Gd)lu-ha-ni I.
Ga-la-Lama
(contemporary
of Dnngil. ofUr)
24 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
The inscription quoted on p. 21 (see especially point 2) giveS
us, as we have seen, a basis for determining the date of the imme-
diate successors of the later patesis of Shirpurla. These successors
are the kings belonging to the second (not first ') dynasty of Ur. Of
one of these kings of Ur we have heard already, viz. Dungi, the con-
temporary of (Ga)lukani (?) and Gala-Lama. This Dungi, as we
know from an inscription of Nabfl-ni'id, was the son of a certain
Ur-Gur, king of Ur. The passage referred to is found in i. R. 68,
No. i. (translated by Peiser, K. B. iii '^. p.. 95). It reads (Col. i. 1. 1 2) :
' In the inscription of Ur-Gur and of Dungi his son I (i. e. Nabfl-
ni'id) found that Ur-Gur had built that zikkurrat, but not com-
pleted it. Dungi his son completed its building ^.' This Ur-Gur
must therefore have been the contemporary of the predecessors of
(Ga)lukani. This second dynasty of Ur ('king of Ur, king of
Shumer and Akkad') must, however, not be confused with the
other dynasties of the same city, for it will be seen that the rulers
of the third and fourth dynasties bear quite different titles from
those of the second. The former rulers (i. e. dynasty of Ur III.)
invariably call themselves lugal Uru-um-'''-ma, ' king of Ur '.' The
representatives of the fourth dynasty of Ur, on the other hand,
have without exception the title ' lugal Uru-um-'''-ma lugal an-ub-da
iab-tab-ba-{ge),' i. e. ' king of Ur, king of the four corners of the
world.'
Assuming the adequacy of this distinction, we are obliged to
refer the Semitic-Babylonian inscription published in Z. D. M. G.
xxix. p. 37 (cp. K. B. iii'. p. 83), which Winckler places among
the inscriptions of Dungi (i. e. Dungi I.) of the second dynasty, to
a certain Dungi (called Dungi III.) of the fourth dynasty of Ur.
' The first dynasty of Ur, as Hilprecht has pointed out, O. B. I. p. 272, is
represented by Lugalkigubnidudu and his son (!) Lugalkisalsi. See p. 23.
' 12 I-na mu-sa-ri-e U Ur-Vl") Gur (so read) 13 u 0'&) Dun-gi mdri-su
a-mur-ma 14 ia zik-ktir-rat 'iu-a-ti 15 Ur-(.ilu) Gur i-pu-iu-ma 16 la u-lak-li-
lu-tii 17 Kil") Dun-gi mdri-U ii-pir-iu 18 u-Uk-lil.
= Comp. Ur-Gur, i. R. 1, No. t ; ibid. No. 3; iv. R. 35, i.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 25
The same is true also of O. B. I. 124, which Hilprecht refers to
Dungi I. ; see Thureau-Dangin, R. S. 1897, p. 74 ^
Before, however, we try to arrange the kings of the third and
(fourth) dynasties of Ur, we must first consider the so-called
kings of Isin. These kings undoubtedly preceded those of the
third dynasty of Ur, as is evident from an inscription published in
i. R. 2, No. vi. i. (comp. Winckler, K. B. iii '. p. 86), where we read :
1. I. ^'l'"^r) Uf^ i. e. For Shamash
1. 7. lugal-a-ni-ir nam-ti
his king,
has for the life
1, 8. Gu-un-gu-nu-um of Gungunu,
1. 9. nita^ lig-go- the mighty hero,
1. 10. lugal Uru-um-^'^-ma- king of Ur,
ka-ku
1. II. Eri'an-na-tum-ma Enannatum(a)
1, 12. en (/)-zi '''''"S'^'^ Nannar the en Q)-zi of Nannar,
{UJiu-£:i)
1. 13. en^'i"'sir) URU-KI the en (high-priest) of Nannar,
1. 14. ^sag Uru-um-^'^-ma in Ur,
1. 15. dumu rs-me-(<^'"sir)-Da-gan son of Ishme-Dagan,
1. 16. E-GI-LI'^-a-ni-in-ru ....
1.18. mu-na-ru built the temple ^-G/-Z/-a-ninru.
This Ishme-Dagan, the father of Enannatum(a), is no other than
Isme-Dagan, en Untig-^^-ga lugal Nt-si-in-^'-na lugal Ki-en-gi-^'-
Vrdu, i. e. the lord of Erech, king of Isin, king of Shumer and
Akkad (comp. also i. R. 36, 2, where the same Enannatum(a) calls
himself the ' dumu (<i'ngir) j^.jneJdmgir) Ba-gan, lugal Kt-en-gt-'''-
Urdu, i. e. the son of Ishme-Dagan, the king of Shumer and Akkad).
From this it follows that :
* The same may be said also of the Semitic inscription published in C. T.
part iii. No. 17288, although the title of king Dungi in this inscription is
unfortunately broken off.
» GI-Ll: pronounce SAR-GUB, and see Scheil, R. T. xix. p. 56.
26 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
(i) Ishme-Dagan was the last of the rulers of Isin, because his son
does not call himself lugal or even patesi, bearing only religious titles.
(2) That the dynasty of Isin was overthrown by Gungunu, king
of the third dynasty of Ur.
(3) If this dynasty was overthrown by Gungunu, then all the
other kings belonging to the same dynasty as Ishme-Dagan must
have preceded Gungunu.
Of the kings who call themselves ' king of Isin \' we have found
so far the following : —
{la-hi-un-a-sar)
Libit- Anunit '
li-bi-gir-ra '
Ur-Ninib
Bur-Sin I?
3
Ti-m^Dagan
Ena7i-na-tum{<i), contemporary of Gungunn,
With this Gungunu, who is called ' king of Ur ' only, have to he
classed Dungi II, and Ur-Gur II.*, because they all bear one and
the same title. After a gap of about one hundred years (p. 40 f.),
we arrive at the fourth dynasty of Ur, headed by Dungi III. The
rulers that belong to this latter dynasty bear the proud title, lugal
' Notice the difference in the titles of these rulers. lalunasar has no
title; Ishbigirra calls himself 'king of Isin' only, while the others term
themselves ' king of Isin, king of Shumer and Akkad ' ; Enannatum has no
title again.
° Called Bur-Sin I. in order to distinguish him from Bur-Sin II. of the fourth
dynasty of Ur.
^ The dots indicate that we do not know whether one mler was the son of
the other. It is possible that between the different rulers other kings have to
be placed.
* About Ur-Gur II. I have my doubts, for it may be possible that he is the
same as Ur-Gur I. ; see sub ' Third dynasty of Ur.'
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 27
Uru-um-'''-ma lugal an-ub-da tab-tab-ha (comp. p. 39), and are the
following : — Dungi III., Bur-Sin II., Gimil-Sin, Ine-Sin, Idtn-Dagan
(Hilprecht, R. R. B. L. p. 84. See, however, sub dynasty of Isin).
In O. B. I. No. 127, rev., last two lines, we find the following
date : —
Mu idineir) QimilMi»sir) Sin In the year when Gimil-Sin,
lugal Uru-um-J''-ma-ge king of tJr,
ma-da Za-ap-la-li-^^ mu-^ul-a brought evil upon the land
of Zapshali.
The earlier part of this tablet contains notices about the reign of
Bur-Sin II. ; we conclude, therefore, that Gimil-Sin was probably
a successor of Bur-Sin II.
This conclusion may be confirmed by the dates of a tablet pub-
lished by Thureau-Dangin, in R. A. iv. p. 142. On that tablet
we find the following dates in succession : —
1 . Mu En Unug-'''-ga ba-a-iug
2. Mu En ¥"'str) Uru-ki-KAR-ZI-DA ba-a-tug
3. Mu (<''»/'■'-) GmiU'^'''e'r) Sin.
Nos. I, 2 occur also on O. B. I. No. 127, obv., 8 and 9, belong
therefore to Bur-Sin II., while No. 3 shows that Gimil-Sin must
have followed Bur-Sin II.
Thureau-Dangin, inR. S. 1897, p. 74, has shown that Dungi III.
was the immediate predecessor of Bur-Sin II., by restoring the his-
torical inscription in O. B. I. No. 124, pi. 54, col. vi., as follows : —
[6V-] Lama '
[fa-ie-'^si
[mu 'i'"^''' Du\n-gi
\u^-kalag\-ga
[lugal lf\rum-ki-ma
» Compare now also C. T. part v. Nos. 12913, 12231, 18933, 19024, and
especially 18346, rev. col. viii, where all the signs are clear, and where we read :
Ur.{dmgir) KAL {=Lama), pa-te-si, mu (.dingir) Dun-gi, lugal Uru-um-ki-ma,
lugal an-ub-da tab-tab-ba-ge, Ki-mai-M ffu-mur-ti-ki, U ma-da-bi ud-ru{m)
mu-gul, mu-ui-sa-a-bi.
28 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
\lugal-a\n-uh-da-\iah-ia]b-ba-ge
. . . . ki . . .
With this he compares a contract-tablet of the Louvre (A. O.
2512), which has the following inscription: —
Ur-Lama pa-te-si mu Bur-Sin lugal.
'II devient,' he says, 'par-la infiniment probable: 1°, que le roi
qui a pr^cM^ Bour-Sin s'appelait Doungi; 2°, qu'il ne doit pas etre
confondu avec Doungi T Ancien, roi de Shoumer et d'Accad'. (Comp.
also above, p. 24.)
In R. A. iv. p. 144, the same scholar has published another
tablet having these dates :
mu ma-gur-mag ba-gim
mu ^-(<^''»«^''')- ? ba-ru
mu W'«ie'» /-«^-W'«i^''-) Sin.
The two former dates preceding the reign of Ine-Sin he refers, with
the help of Constantinople, No. 831, to Gimil-Sin, thus making
Gimil-Sin precede Ine-Sin. (See on the whole subject, Thureau-
Dangin, R. S. 1897, p. 72 ff. ') The succession of the kings of the
third and fourth dynasty of Ur would then be : —
Third Dynasty.
Gungunu
Ur-Gur li. (?)
Dungi II,
Fourth Dynasty.
Dungi in.
Bur-Sin II.
Vr-B(Cu II. (see below)
Gimil-Sin
Ine-Sin
Idtn-Dagan
' Now also O. L. Z. i. 167 ff.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
29
The rulers and representatives of the different dynasties in this
period might be arranged as follows : —
Shirpurla. Ur. Uruk-Amnann '. Isin.
{fld)lu-ka-ni I.
Go-la- Lamia)
Ur-Gur
I
Dungi I.
Sin-g&mil
Sin-gdUd '
{Ga)lu-ka-ni II.
[la-lu-un-a-sar)
I
Libit-Anunit
rs-bi-gir-ra
Ur-Ninib
Bur-Sin I.
li-me-Dagan
I
En-an-na-tum(a)
Gungunu ^
Ur-Gur 11. (?)
Dungi II.
Dungi III.
Bur-Sin II.
I,
Ur-Ba'u II.
Gimil-Sin
Ine-Sin
Idtn-Dagan
' The date of this small kingdom, to which the above-named two {sic) rulers
belong, is very doubtful. Winckler (Altorientalische Forschungen, pp. 231,
232) places them 'at about the same period' as Ur-Gur, while Hommel
(Geschichte, p. 206) wants to put them before the second dynasty of Ur, but
' um einige Jahrhunderte spdter ah 3800 B. c.'; Lehmann (Zwei Probleme,
p. 175), even after the fourth dynasty of Ur. . I am inclined to place them with
all reserve after Dungi I., but before Ur-Ninib; see what is said about these
rulers farther on.
^ Whether the dynasty of Gungunu preceded that of Dungi III. is very doubtful.
30 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
A Chronological Table, containing the names of all ' rulers of Old
Babylonia from the oldest times down to the time of Hammurabi,
the contemporary of Abraham, will be found opposite. A few
words of explanation would seem necessary as regards the dates
which are there assigned to the diiferent rulers ''.
The starting-point of the calculations is Sargon I., 3800 b.c.
According to p. 9, Sargon I. belongs to the third period of
' With the exception of a certain KU?-URU {fite. O. B. I. 87, ii. 32, 34)-
(dingir) JJtu, who Calls \am's&iilugal Ma-uru-ki fa-te-si gaUdingir) En-lil, i.e.
king of MA-URU, the great patesi of Bel ; C. T. part v. No. 12146. This
king no doubt belongs to the time between Urukagina and Lngalzaggisi. The
patesis of Nippur have not been mentioned, because they probably held only
religions positions, i. e. they were patesis of B61 rather than of Nippur. Comp.
however O. B. I. 94, where Ur-Enlil calls himself dam-kar-gal, with O. B. I.
96 and 97, where he has the title fa-te-si En-lil-fii-da. If, however, Ur-Enlil
was a patesi of Nippur in the secular sense of the term, he must belong to the
period preceding Urukagina. The same may be true of Ur-Ma-ma, the davi-
kar-gal of Bel, O. B. I. 95, and ibid. p. 262, 6. Two other patesis of Nippur,
living at the time of Dungi, the nitag lig-ga lugal Uru-um-ki-ma lugal Ki-en-
gi-Urdu (i.e. Dungi I.), are Ur-UHfr''-) AJV-MAd{?) and his father Lugal-
kal-la (Hommel, Geschichte, p. 334). Ha-di-lia-mi-ir, patesi oi Fi {T)-kti-un-
Sin, may belong either to the time of Ur-Gur of the second dynasty of Ur, or to
an unknown Ur-Gur of the third dynasty (comp. p. 37, note 2), for in the inscrip-
tion referred to (i. R. i, i. No. 10) Hashhamir calls Ur-Gur only nitag lig-ga
lugal Uru-um-ki-ma, Other patesis may belong to the period covered by our
Chronological Table, as c. g. a certain IP-SA-(dingir) INNANA-ERIN?
patesi of INNANA-ERINki — a city frequently mentioned in tablets of the
fourth dynasty of Ur — who at the same time is a 'iakkan&ku ma-ti Elamfi
(U. A. G. p. 157, No. 8; Hommel, P. S. B. A. 1896, 23) ; a certain (.•l'')-Mu-
ta-bil, a "iakkandku of D-dr-ilu-ki (ibid. p. 156, No. 7); a certain . . . U,
patesi of . . . mu-tuk . . , ki (A. F. p. 545, No. 3) ; a certain . . . zi, lugal
AL (or GISDIN, not TE !) (ibid. No. 4, probably the same as Ba-zi lugal Al,
C. T. part vii. No. 12033); and a certain {Ga)luAdingir) Utu (Amel-Shamash),
patesi of Giiui-I'i (T. C. part i. p. 50, No. 96-6-12, 3). Very old are also the
two seal-cylinders published by Hommel, Geschichte, p. 290 : Zi{?)mA-i-lum,
dumu . . ., pa-te-si, Dun-iil-ki-la ; and p. 293 : da, pa-te-si ^IT-TAR-ki.
All these names have not been mentioned in our Chronological Table, because
they were not important for our chronology.
" It is hardly necessary to say here, that these dates are only approximate
and tentative — thus differing essentially from those of Lehmann, which are
given as absolutely certain ; so certain that Nabfl-nS'ld's statement has to give
place to the calculations of that scholar.
Ki-en-gi
( = Lagash?)
En-shag-kush-an-na,
before 4500 b. c.
(the 'J
Kengi)^
(writter ;h)
■go-
Ni-si-in-^'-na
(=Isin)
Un-KTB-NUN-'''
( = Larsa)
KA-DINGIR-RA-ki
(= Babylon)
Nim-{ma)-^'
( = Elam)
s-
era.
■-I _ t^ .
N* '^
fejii I
5 TO s
~ tw II &■ re ^
s
B
S
O
t3
O
1
O
-^
3.
T!
y
N
•gl.
[3 StJ-
O 5^
S' S4,
H
a -
So
"I
n
t3-
t«3
w ^ 5 8
^ (^ !3 &^
? i=r ^ a- s ?? ^
&•=§.?;. a
a.,;
9k
M 8
00 S^
O Oq
63 »
-oS.-
^
s
'^
fN
tx 8.
ii .3 '"' 2 3 .S rS o
• ^ S ,8 . .§
^ ^ I
•1^
•ll
3. §8
I CO
8 «
1*1
M
H:* -t!* ^ ES ^
■tar?-r? — '—r — *
-.8 8
•■S5S
;§ o
o
CO
8 sa
8
. o
N CO
S= .8
« s 't^ '•*
k o
13 00
^^ CO
_ I o ^- ^ _4 3 .■? „
I . ta v^ "^ c^ S 5
' CO
S
05
a
I
«
a
p.
rt
t;
1
o
a
i)
s
i
CO
O V
a
bus
0-T3
vi
."ts 13 ■<
o
o
8 n
<^ o
»-, OJi
S 8 8
- '^00
■ 8 "^
— 3—
3,8
•I
8
1^
^ur'
■ a
-3
■ sg,
"S •
. §"-
• S,o
8^o
kj oo
^ CO
o
ft)
>feoa.
o
f 5-
a.
•1^ o
CO
4
t?
^
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 31
cuneiform writing, which begins with Lugalzaggisi, and ends with
Ur-Ba'u. According to the list on p. 23, Sargon I. and his son
Naram-Sin come in the middle of this period, which period was
said to extend over a space of 500 years. Hence Lugalzaggisi
probably lived at about 4000 e.g., and Ur-Ba'u at about 3500 b.c.
In the middle stands Naram-Sin at 3750 b.c.
In making the date of Naram-Sin and Sargon I. the starting-
point of our calculation we differ essentially from Thureau-Dangin
and Lehmann, both of which scholars make Gudea, as it seems,
the starting-point. They fix first the date of Gudea — a date
which is arrived at by supplying a 'goodly lot' of 'ifs' — and
then they manufacture the date of Sargon I. ; and, as we should
naturally expect, the result of so precarious an argument is
a denial of the accuracy of Nabfi-nS,'id's statement. In this they
are, however, not alone. The date of Naram-Sin was rejected
by Eduard Meyer, Geschichte des Alterthums, i. (1884) § 133;
Winckler, U. A. G., p. 44 ff., and A. F. p. 550 : ' Kurz vor der
Dynastic von UR I! Thureau-Dangin (R. A. iv. p. 72) writes:
'Entre Tdcriture des tablettes (i. e. the contract (?)-tablets (sur argile)
of Sharganisharah and Naram-Sin) et celle des inscriptions de Gudia,
par exemple, il existe des differences assez pro/ondes, ces differences ne
peuvent correspondre en aucune fagon a I'dnorme intervalle d'environ
mille ans qui s' impose au cas oil on accepte les donnies de Nabonide.
Force est done de rabaisser dans une large mesure la date generale-
ment attribute a Sargon et a Naram-Sin, et de placer la domination
d'Agade non pas dans la premilre, mais dans la seconde moiti^, peut-
etre mSme vers la fin de la seconde moitii du quatrieme milUnaire'.
According to this statement Thureau-Dangin would be satisfied
if there existed between Sargon I. and Gudea only about 500 years.
Instead, however, of putting Sargon I. further down in time, thus
questioning Nabfl-nd'id's statement, that scholar should revise his
date of Gudea. Gudea lived, not at 2800 b.c, but at 3300 b.c.
(see Chronological Table). A date so uncertain as that of Gudea
at present is should not supersede the certain date of Sargon I.
Last of all, the date of Naram-Sin seems to have found a deter-
32 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
mined enemy in Lehmann, Zwei Hauptprobleme der altorien-
talischen Chronologic, Leipzig, 1898, p. 175 fF.
This scholar finds the same difBculty as Thureau-Dangin (see
above, p. 31), viz. that between Gudea and Naram-Sin there
exists a space of a thousand years, which is, as he expresses it,
'ein Jahrtausend volliger Leere — ein absolutes Vacuum' (p. 179).
But how does that scholar know that Gudea lived exactly at
2700 B.C. ; a date which he considers so trustworthy that the one
given by Nabfl-ni'id for Sargon I. has to be rejected ? He argues :
The date of Kudurnanhundi I, probablj' the immediate prede-
cessor of Kudurnuhgamar (= IDyP'l'l?, Gen. 14) is 2280 B.C.
(or 1,635 years before Ashurbanabal). Kudurnuhgamar' was,
he says, a contemporary (? ?) of Hammurabi (PB'iDS), who reigned,
according to this scholar's view, from 2248-2194 B.C., or forty
years later, as we have proposed. Forty years, indeed, is not
a great difference. This date might be accepted, but not the dates
which he assigns to. the dynasties preceding this Elamite invasion
under Kudurnanhundi. Having fixed this date, he says : ' Von
dem Elamiten-Einfall zuriick bis hinauf zu der bisher sogenannten
" ersten Dynastie von Ur " (i. e. the second dynasty : Ur-Gur and
Dungi 1.) haben wir eine einigermassen (sic) fortlaufende Kunde,
so dass sich die Zeit '' der ersten Dynastie von Ur " mit einiger
Annaherung (notice his wording!!) berechnen Idsst' (ibid. p. 175).
The dynasties which preceded the Elamite invasion are (ibid,
p. 175) that of Erech, second (i.e. third) of Ur, Isin, first (i.e.
second) of Ur. He also ascribes certain years to these different
dynasties, saying : if we attribute to the dynasty of Erech fifty
years, then we get to the year 2330 b. c. (2280 + 50). 1/ we
attribute to the second dynasty of Ur at the very most 120 years,
then we arrive at the year 2450 (2330+120), and 'gehen wir
dann weiter zu der Dynastie von Isin, von der uns filnf Herrscher
bekannt sind, und rechnen, wiederum reichlich, 150 Jahre, so
' For the correct reading of this name see I. A. Knudtzon and Fr. Delitzsch
in B. A. iv. p. 88 ff. against V. Scheil in R. T. xix, 1896, pp. 40-44. It should be
read : Kudur-DtigmaI(?) = KudOT-Lagamar (Hommel, P.S.B. A. 1896, p. 24).
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 33
erreichen wir das Jahr 2600, und wollen wir einen Spielraum fUr
uns unhekannte Herrscher annehmen, ca. 2650. Der DynasHe von
Isin tst die " erste von Ur" vorausgegangen, von der uns zwet
Herrscher bekanni sind. Es mogen deren noch mehr gewesen sein,
aber ein Jahrhundert ist nach unseren jetzigen Nachrichten schon
ein ijberreicher Ansatz. Der Beginn der " erslen Dynastie '' fiele
2\so frilheskns ca. 2700 (2750) b. c' (p. 176). And Gudea, being
only one generation ahead of Dungi I., must have reigned there-
fore ' eben/alls urn oder kurz vor 2700 (2750) hochstens! This is
the way Lehmann manufactures the date of Gudea ! ! It is so
certain Gudea reigned at 2750 that there cannot be any doubt,
so absolutely certain that even the dates of Naram-Sin and Sargon I.,
testified to by Nabfl-n^'id, have to give way. But he continues
(p. 179) : ' Somit hahen wir nun folgenden Thathestand (indeed ! ?) :
Um 2700 Gudea und kurz vor ihm Ur-Bau. Um 3750 nach
Nabonid!s Angabe Naram-Sin und Lugal-u^um-gal. Zwischen
beiden also ein Jahrtausend, ein Jahrtausend vQlIiger Leere — ein
absolutes Vacuum! This, however, as he rightly says, cannot
be possible, and thus, his conclusion is, Nabfl-na'id's statement
must be wrong (pp. 179, 185). But how does he get over
this difficulty? If we read, he tells us, instead of III.M.II.C.
(3200) simply II.M.II.C. (2200) in Nabft-na'id's statement, where
these figures are very clearly written, ' so sind alle Schwierig-
keiten behoben' (p. 187). He, however, feels that there must be
a somewhat greater space between Naram-Sin (2750) and Gudea
(2700) than only fifty years, and thus ' nehmen wir in Nabonid's
Angabe den im vorliegenden Fall, bei der Hohe der Zahl, vielleicht
etwas niedrig gegriffetten Spielraum von z^ Jahr en nach oben und
unten an, so ergiebt sich, dass Naram-Sin nicht vor 2779 zu
regieren aufgeh'drt haben und nicht spdter als 2713 zur Regierung
gekommen sein kann' (ibid. p. 189).
This is that scholar's argument — an argument which required
a good deal of liberality on Lehmann's part in order to find out
the exact date of Gudea, 2700 b. c. It would hardly seem necessary
to say very much against a date which was established and made
34 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
an absolute fact (Thatlestani) by premises introduced by mere ' ifs.'
But the position of that scholar in the learned world constrains
us to answer him.
I. According to Lehmann's calculation the date of Gudea was
'um Oder kurz vor 2700 (2750) hochstens b. c' (p. 176). Shortly
before Gudea (p. 179, note 4) we must place Ur-Ba'u and Nam-
magni. Suppose, for the sake of argument, both these rulers reigned
only twenty years together, Ur-Ba'u would therefore have begun to
reign either about 2720 at the very least, or about 2770 atT;he most.
Now Naram-Sin, according to Lehmann's argument, must have
reigned somewhere between the years 2713 and 2779 (p. 189).
Hence, if these calculations are correct, Ur-Ba'u and Nammagni
must have been contemporaries of Naram-Sin. But from inscrip-
tions we know that a certain Lugalushumgal, patesi of Shirpurla,
was the contemporary of Naram-Sin. This fact alone shows how
utterly groundless Lehmann's calculations are. Or does he be-
lieve that at the time of Naram-Sin there were two, or possibly three,
patesis in Shirpurla, who were all contemporaries of Naram-Sin ?
But further, Thureau-Dangin, in R. A. iv. No. iii. pi. ix. No. 31,
published a remarkable tablet from the time of Naram-Sin (rev. 1. r),
on the reverse of which (1. 5) a certain UJR-E, patesi of Shirpurla-*',
is mentioned. The same tablet also mentions on the obverse (1. 9)
a patesi of Uru-um-^'ma (= Ur), whose name probably was
Ur-(''i''eir) Utu {Kalhi-ShamasK) '
Now let us make a diagram according to Lehmann's chronology :
Ur-Bdu ) [between 2770 and 2750
Lugal-uium-gal Nam-mag-ni \ (2720 and 2700)] Naram-Sin
[between 2779 and | [between 2779 and 2713]
2713] Gu-de-a Ur-Gur
2700 [2750] I
Ur-Nin-gir-su Dungi I.
\c. 2700(2750)] \c. 2700 (2750)]
' The two lines in question read :
Ur-(<iingir) Utu-ge
\na\m {J)-pa-te-si Uru-um-ki-ma
The NAM before pa-te-si may make it doubtful whether UrMingir) Utu was the
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 35
But to this diagram have to be added UR-E, patesi of Shirpurla,
contemporary of Naram-Sin and the patesi (^UR-'''^'"sir) UTU ?) of
Ur*. Thus we would have reigning at the time of Naram-Sin
(between 2779 and 2 7 1 3) four patesis (Ur-Ba'u, Nammagni, Lugal-
ushumgal, and Ur-E) in Shirpurla ; one king (Ur-Gur), and at the
same time one patesi [Ur-^'''"^'''') UTU P) in Ur ! ! Tliis is the his-
torical solution at which Lehmann arrives I ! Indeed, instead of
clearing up the subject, Lehmann has only confused it worse
than it was before his book was written. This alone would make
a further argument unnecessary, but in order to corroborate our
position and to show why we assigned to the kings of the
different dynasties the dates as given in our Chronological Table,
we proceed.
2. Lehmann (ibid. p. 176) makes the statement: ' Sein Sohn
(i. e. Gudea's son) Ur-nin-gir-su ist Dungis I. VasalV. As autho-
rity for this statement he takes Winckler, U. A. G. p. 42. On
account of the importance of that passage we quote it in full :
' Doss zwischen Dungi und Gudea ein Zeitraum von mindestens
1 03 Jahren liegen miisse, gait bisher ah sicker (Hommel, Geschichte,
p. 3 1 9), durch etne Inschrifi des British Museum Idsst sick indessen
mit Sicherheit (sic ! ?) anders die Frage losen. Dieselhe steht auf
einem zum Kopfaufsalz einer kleinen Statue bestimmten Gegenstande
aus griinem Stein (78, 12-18, i) und darin widmet "fiir das Leben
Dungis, Kdnigs von Ur" Ur-nin-gir-su in ki. aga an Nind gid, der
Ninlil jenen Gegenstand. Dieser Ur-nin-gir-su findet sick nun mit
demselben Titel (welcher wahrscheinlich irgend eine priesterliche
Wiirde bezeichnet) auf Backsteinen und einer steinernen Schale aus
person that held the patesiate of Ur at the time of Naram-Sin. So much how-
ever is certain, that at the time of Naram-Sin there was a \nd\m-pa-te-si of Ur,
hence also a patesi.
1 Lehmann's statement therefore (ibid. p. 183) : 'Zwischen Ur-Gur von Ur
und Dungi von Ur {in Nippur') und den nngefahi gleichzeitigen (ibid. p. 176)
patesfs Ur-Ba'u und Gude'a (in Laga's = Shirpurla) auf der einen Seite,
Naram-Sin und Lugal-uium-gal auf der anderen Seite, ist in Nippur wie
in Lagai nicht ein Herrschemame erhalten,' betrays ignorance. See our
Chronological Table.
D 2
36 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
Telloh wieder {Heuzey, Revue arch. 1886, //. 2 ; Sarzec, DA.
pi. 37, 8) und es kann keinem Zweifel unterliegen, dass er derselbe
ist, wekher auf einer Steininschrift {D/c. 37, 9) sich " patesi von
Sir-pur-la;' Sohn Gudeas, nennt. Er wird bei Lebzeiten seines
Vaters eine Priesterwurde bekleidet haben und ist denn nach dessen
Tode patesi geworden. Wir erhalten so fur die Zeit DungHs im
ganzen mindestens drei von ihm abhdngige patesis :
Gudea,
Ur-nin-gir-su, sein Sohn,
Lu-ka-ni (oder Gal-ka-ni).
Wir wissen nicht, welches die Reihenfolge dieser drei war. Wenn
Gudea der erste von ihnen war, so wird er noch in die Zeit Ur-
gurs von Ur hineingereicht haben, andernfalls wurde dies fur
Gal-ka-ni eintreffenl This is the locus classicus, on which
Lehmann partly builds his chronology.
(a) If this be true, then Dungi I. must have been a contem-
porary of at least the following four persons ' :
Gudea,
Ur-Ningirsu, his son,
(Ga)lukani, and
Gala-Lama, his son.
Dungi I. must clearly have lived to a fabulous age !
(3) Even if in this inscription Ur-Ningirsu had, according to
WincMer, a ' prieslerliche Wilrde,' — for en ki-ag may be translated
by ' beloved high-priest,' see Dates of Dungi III. — but then it would
not follow as yet that he exercised that priestly function during the
life of his father, who is said to be Dungi, ' king of Ur, king of
Shumer and Akkad.' If Ur-Ningirsu was high-priest at all, he
was it during the time of ' Dungi, king of Ur.' Winckler must first
prove that those two Dungis are one and the same person.
* We say ' at least,' for there possibly may be discovered another patesi who
lived between Ur-Ningirsu and (Ga)lukani (see Chronological Table).
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 37
Lehmann himself ought to have seen Winckler's curious
argument, and not have followed him blindly.
(c) In the inscription above referred to Winckler says that
Ur-Ningirsu dedicates that ' Gegensiand! Hovifever, the fact is not
so ; neither does Ur-Ningirsu dedicate, nor does he dedicate, but
' lady Bdu-ninan makes something for Ninlil.'
The whole inscription reads (comp. Jensen, K. B. iii ^ p. 68 ii.) :
Nin-lil For Ninlil
nin-a-ni his mistress
nam-ti has for the life
(.dingir) Bun-gi of Pungi,
nita^ lig-ga the strong hero,
lugal Uru-um-J'^-ma-ka-ku the king of Ur,
(dingir) Ba-u-nifi-a-ati Ba'u-ninan
ZABAR-KU the ZABAR-KU
Ur-^'''''S''-)Nin-gir-su of Ur-Ningirsu,
en-ki-ag C*"^^''') Nind-ka-g( the beloved lord of Nind,
GI-LI nam-sa,l-ka-ni (for) a GI-LI {= ornament =
sar-gub) of her (=Ninlirs)
womanhood
mu-na-gim made.
One can see instantly that this Ur-Ningirsu is no other than
Ur-Ningirsu of Telloh, who later on became patesi. Lehmann, of
course, is of the same mind as Winckler. This fitted well into
his chronology. No, the inscription above quoted shows clearly
that this Ur-Ningirsu (together with that mentioned in D^c. 37, 8*)
was a contemporary of ' D.ungi, king of Ur,' i. e. of Dungi II. and
not of Dungi I ^,
(li) The very fact that Ur-Ningirsu here, as well as in D^c.
37, 8, has not the title ' patesi,' which we find in all the other
* That inscription reads : Ur-Ningirsu, the en-me-zi of Anna, the me-ad-azag
(probably = an attribute to Anna), the ' beloved high-priest ' of NinS. (See
on the other hand Jensen's translation in K. B. iii '. p. 67.)
» For it will be noticed that the Dungi here has exactly the same title as
Gungunu (i. R. 2, No. vi. i), viz. nita^ lig-ga lugal Uru-um-ki-ma-ka.
38 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
inscriptions of Ur-Ningirsu, patesi of Shirpurla, is reason and
proof enough that he cannot be identical with that well-known
patesi, the son of Gudea, and also that Gudea himself was not
a contemporary of Dungi I.
The result then is :
In the inscription there is not one syllable to prove that the
Ur-Ningirsu there mentioned is Gudea's son. The very fact,
however, that in case Ur-Ningirsu were a contemporary of Dungi I.
— which Winckler wants to prove and which Lehmann accepts as
proved— we should have at least four patesis' during the lifetime
of Dungi, shows clearly enough that Winckler's hypothesis is
improbable, yes, impossible.
3. Above (p. 21) it has been shown that Gala-Lama, together with
his father (Ga)lukani I., were dependent upon Dungi I., son of Ur-Gur.
At the present we, however, do not know if Ur-Ningirsu was the
father of (Ga)lukani, and thus a contemporary of Ur-Gur. As
lon^ as we do not know this we are justified in placing a ' gap '
between Ur-Ningirsu and (Ga)lukani. This ' gap ' would remove
Ur-Ningirsu at least one generation from (Ga)lukani, and thus put
him also before Ur-Gur. In our Chronological Table we placed Ur-
Ninsun between (Ga)lukani and Ur-Ningirsu. Whether he belongs'
We must therefore place this Dungi after Gungunu, and thus distinguish
between the following three Dungis :
Dungi I. (II. Ur) : lugal Uru-um-ki-ma lugal Ki-en-gi-ki- Urdu ;
Dungi II. (III. Ur) ; lugal Uru-um-ki-ma-ka ;
Dungi III. (IV. Ur) : lugal Uru-um-^'-ma lugal an-ub-da tab-tab-ba-ge,
or in Semitic: "iar Uri "iar ki-ib-ra-tim ar-ba-im. Whether we ought
to distinguish also between Ur-Gur I. (II. Ur), lugal Uru-um-^'-ma lugal
Ki-en-gi-^i-Urdu, and Ur-Gur II. (III. Ur), lugal Uru-umM-ma, is doubt-
ful. For a discussion of the question whether Dungi I. may not be the
same as Dungi III. (comp. Winckler, O. L. Z. i. 238, and Thureau-Dangin,
ibid. p. 174), see sub 'Fourth dynasty of Ur.' We believe that we have to
distinguish between these rulers according to their titles. In our Chronological
Table we have indicated this sufficiently.
^ And these patesis themselves must have lived quite a number of years,
especially Gudea and Ur-Ningirsu.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 39
there or not does not affect our argument. If he does not we would
have to place him before Gudea, supplying between this latter
ruler and the former again a ' gap.' In this case Ur-Ninsun simply
would reduce the gap between Ur-Ba'u and Gudea \ Further, we
do not know whose son Gudea was. Consequently we must supply
a gap between Gudea and Ur-Ninsun and between Ur-Ninsun and
Nammagni. We obtain then the following succession : —
UrSa'u
1 (?)
Nam-mag-ni
. . gap . .
Ur-Ninsun
• ■ gap . .
Gu-de-a
Vr-Nin-gir-su
• ■ gap . . Ur-Gurl.
{fid)lu-ka-ni,\
I [• contemporaries of Dungi I.
Gala-Lama ]
This shows clearly that Ur-Ningirsu cannot have been the contem-
porary of Dungi I. In our table we assigned to Gudea a reign of
about fifty years — on account of the many buildings he executedj
the material for which buildings he got from the most distant places
— all which must have consumed much time. Between Ur-Ba'u
and Gudea we claimed a space of about 200 years "^ on account of
palaeographic evidence — the sign for KA shows that clearly. Thus
it will be seen that our arrangement is true to the present state of
science, claiming ' gaps ' where we do not know the succession of
rulers, and where palaeography enjoins us to do so. If we bear
* This however would prove fatal again. For, if this arrangement were
correct, then Naram-Sin would be a contemporary of at least five patesis of
Shirpuria, viz. Ur-Ba'u, Nammagni, Lngalushumgal, UR-E, Ur-Ninsun — all
living between the years 2779 and 2713 B. c. — and a contemporary of one
patesi of Ur and also of king Ur-Gur of Ur ! ! See p. 34.
' See p. 19.
40 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
this in mind, we are fully justified in assigning for the space
between Ur-Ba'u and (Ga)lukani about 350 years.
Lehmann very generously (' Uberreichlicher Ansatz ') ascribes to
the dynasty of Isin 150 years; we, 200 years. Lehmann again
forgets that we have to allow for unknown rulers and for the gaps
existing between them (comp. also his ' Tabelle I : Reihenfolge
unbestimmt') some more years; thus two hundred years at least
must be ascribed to this dynasty.
Isin was overthrown by Gungunu. Further below it will be
shown that there is an important difference in the titles of Gungunu
and Dungi III. ; the former being called only king of Vr, while the
latter is always termed king of Ur, king of the four corners of the
world. This difference is a very marked one. Had Gungunu
been also ' king of the four corners of the world ' — thus belonging to
the same dynasty as Dungi III. — surely Enannatum(a) would not
have dared to attribute to his lord so humble a title. Again, we
do not know that Dungi III. was the son of Gungunu ; thus we
are forced by necessity — if we wish to be scientific — -to claim
another gap between these two rulers ' ; and since their titles are so
very different, it follows that this gap must be a considerable one ;
nay, it seems to show that Gungunu belongs to a different dynasty.
And even z/"this were not the case, the very fact that Dungi III. must
have conquered the four corners of the world before he could
assume this title — a feat not achieved in a few days — is reason
enough to claim for this gap 100 years. (Comp. also Sargon I.,
who conquered the four corners of the world, but only Naram-Sin,
his son, called himself ' sar kibrat arba'im.')
As regards the succession of the rulers of the fourth dynasty of
Ur, it is, even according to Thureau-Dangin (against Lehmann,
p. 174), Dungi III., Bur-Sin III. (Ur-Ba'u, son of Bur-Sin II.),
Gimil-Sin, Ine-Sin, and according to Hilprecht also, Idin-Dagan.
Lehmann assigns to this dynasty — again very generously ( 'sehr
reichlich') — about 120 years, although he is able to ascribe with
certainty to the four rulers of this house only 67 years (see Tabelle I :
' Comp. also Winckler, U. A. G. pp. 39, 40.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 41
12 + 5 + 9 + 41 years), thus making their dynasty last about twice
as long as he can prove.
Further on it will be shown that we can ascribe to the
different rulers of this dynasty with certainty the following number
of years :—
to Dungilll.: 51 years.
Bur-Sin II.: 13 „
Gimil-Sin : 10 ,,
Ine-Sin : at least 2
not classified dates : 10 years — total ' 86 years.
Doubling, as Lehmann does, this number, we would get about 172
years, and allowing for Ur-Ba'u, son of Bur-Sin II., and Idin-
Dagan only 20 years, we would be able to fill up the 200 years for
this dynasty. But all the rulers of this dynasty are not yet known,
nor do we know whether one was the immediate successor of the
other ; thus we may take Lehmann's 50 years for the ' SpielraumfUr
uns ufibekannte Herrscher'. This would make this dynasty rule for
about 250 years ^-
For the two rulers of the dynasty of Erech, who are not said to
have been father and son, we ascribe 100 years — 50 years more
than Lehmann does. It is hardly possible to imagine that only
these two rulers should have reigned in Erech.
In regard to our difference in fixing the date of PJammurabi, we
need not spend many words, for this difference is only one of 40 years.
The predecessors of IJammurabi reigned 112 years.
' Since the publication of ' Cuneiform Texts from Babylonian Tablets, &c.,
in the British Museum,' Parts I-VIII, we are able to increase this ' total ' by
about ten years more. See sub ' Fourth dynasty of Ur.'
' As is apparent from our Chronological Table, we have divided the
so-called third dynasty of Ur into two: viz. the third and the fourth. Six
rulers we were able to enumerate as belonging to the latter dynasty. Claiming
an average reign of twenty years for each king, we would get about 1 20 years.
But we know that Dungi III. alone reigned fifty-one years at least ; we have to
add therefore thirty years to those 120 years. Furthermore, we ought to allow
about 100 years for the gaps and for the unknown rulers. Thus we may very well
be allowed to make this dynasty rule about 250 years. See Chronological
Table.
42 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
Now let us count up these figures and see where we can put
Ur-Ba'u.
2288 (date of Hammurabi) ' + 112 years=2400 e.g. : beginning
of the first dynasty of Babylon in the north and that of Larsa in
the south, both of which dynasties divide ' the kingdom of the four
corners of the world ' under Ur I V." These troubles must have been
of grave consequence, for they bring another people (the Elamites)
into Babylonia under Kudurnanhundi, who undoubtedly tried to
take advantage of the confusion in Babylon. Probably there was
even anarchy in Babylonia before Babylon I.'' acquired the
dominion.
2400+250 (= number of years during which Ur IV. reigned)
brings us to about 2650, and including the anarchy, to 2700 B.C.
Between Dungi III. and Gungunu lie about 100 years=28oo; 200
years for Isin=3000 B.C. ; 100 for Erech = 3ioo B.C. At this time
reigned, or better ceased to reign, Ur II. (Dungi I.) ; (Ga)lukani, his
contemporary, began to reign at about 3150. Between (Ga)lukani
and Ur-Ba'u are about 350 years, hence Ur-Ba'u probably reigned at
about 3500, and Naram-Sin at 3750 — only a space of about 250
years (!). These 250 years are partly covered by Ur-E, patesi of
Shirpurla, and Ur-Utu (?), patesi of Uru-um-^'-ma (Ur).
Where does Lehmann's vacuum remain ? Thureau-Dangin was
satisfied to claim a space of about 500 years between Naram-Sin
and Gudea. Will Lehmann be content with 250 years — just one-
half of Thureau-Dangin's concession ?
Indeed, 250 years is not much, if we remember that we are only
beginning to know something about Old Babylonian history and
chroriology.
4. Lehmann, however, tries to argue from palaeography that
Naram-Sin cannot have lived before 2750 b.c, saying (p. i^^) :
' For the different dates assigned to Ktammnrabi see Fr. Hommel, Altisraeli-
tische tJberlieferung, pp. 120, I3i ; J. Orr, Expository Times of March, 1897,
pp. 161-177 ; Fr. Hommel, ibid., March, 1899, P- ^T^-
" Short expressions for ' Fourth dynasty of Ur,' and ' First dynasty of
Babylon,' which latter generally is called the ' H:ammurabi dynasty.'
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
43
' I^s wird Manchem ergangen sein wie mir, den bet einem Vergleich
der Schrifizeichen auf der Vase Nardm-Sin's mit den Strichfiguren
der alteren und Sltesten Documente am Telloh stels ein Ge/Uhl volliger
Rathlosigkeit heschlich, wenn er sich danach den Gang der Entwick-
lung, zunachst auf palaeographischem Gebiet, Mar machen wollte.
Auf der einen Seiie wohl entwickelte For men vollendeter Keilschrift-
zeichen, die aus dem Jahre 3750 stammen sollen, auf der anderen
Seite ungleich primitivere Strichfiguren, die urn das Jahr 3000 in
Gebrauch sein miissen.'
One may well ask, how does Lehmann know that the signs in
the older and oldest documents from Telloh must have been in use
at about 3000 b. c. ? On the contrary, on the authority of Nabfl-
na'id, we know that the writing as exhibited on the tablets of
Sargon I. must have been in use at 3800 B.C.; hence 'die ungleich
primitiveren Strichfiguren ' of the oldest rulers in Telloh must be
older, must antedate Sargon I., as has been shown above.
It is impossible to follow Lehmann's arguments. We must hold
to the accuracy of Nabfl-na'id's statement, and not give it up for
a doubtful date, as that of Gudea necessarily must be. Naram-Sin
then reigned at 3750 b.c. ', and Gudea at somewhere about 3300 b.c.
King of ICengi.
The oldest king of Babylonia, of whom we have any record, is
Enshagkushanna^, whose date we have placed before 4500 b.c. He
• So also Oppert, Journal Asiatique, 1883, i. p. 89; Latrille, Z. K. ii. 357;
Tiele, Geschichte, 114; Hommel, Geschichte, 166, 309; Delitzsch-Murdter,
Geschichte^, 73 ; Maspero, Dawn of Civilization, p. 599 ; Hilprecht, O. B. I.
p. 241.
' That this is the right pronunciation of the name — s.-aiaoiEn4ag-sag-an-na
(Hilprecht) — has been shown by Thureau-Dangin, R. A. iv. p. 70, note 6.
KUS, see E. 0.192. SAG differs considerably; comp. T. C. 221 and E. C.
191. The name may mean ' Wise Qag-kui, Br. 8049, muUdlu) is the lord {en)
of heaven ' {an-na). Hilprecht translated the name according to his reading,
'Lord is the king of heaven.' His inscriptions are published in O. B. I.,
Nos. 90, 91, 92 ; comp. Hilprecht, 1. c. p. 261 ff.
44 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
calls himself lord of Kengi',' the southern (?) part of Babylonia. As to
his nationality, whether he was a so-called ' Sumerian ' or a ' Semite,'
we have no means of knowing ^ Besides ' lord of Kengi,' he seems
to have had another title, viz. ' king of . . .' The lacuna probably
contained the name of the capital of the kingdom ^ He must
have waged war against Kish in Northern Babylonia, which city he
terms 'wicked of heart.' He was the victor, and presented the
spoil to ' Enlil, king of the lands.' Enlil— the later B^l — was the
chief god in Nippur; Nippur accordingly was called En-lil-''',
the ' city of Enlil.' Hence Enlil of Nippur seems to have been
the god who wielded the chief influence over the inhabitants of
Early Babylonia. From inscriptions of certain patesis of Shirpurla,
as well as from those of Lugalzaggisi, we know that this temple
was under the control of the king, who called himself accordingly
patesi-gal, ' the great patesi.' But it also had its own ' chief local
administrator,' the dam-kar-gal^, who in his turn had several
minor priests or patesis under him. The cult of this god seems
to have been well arranged ; the king, being the summus episcopus,
had a host of other officers (priests) under him, who exercised the
ordinary functions of the so-called ' priesthood ' of BSl.
' See O. B. I. 90, 1. 4 and note ; p. 58, note 6 ; and Hommel, P. S. B. A.,
1894, p. 209. ^ But see under Lugalzaggisi.
= Hilprecht, O. B. I. p. 262 : ' In all probability it was Erech ' ; and 1. u.
note 2 : ' The traces do not point to the ideogram of Unug, more to kalama,'
' Comp. for instance O. B. I. No. 94, and 1. c. p. 262, 6 :
J . (Dingir) Nin-din-iug or better \. e. To Ba'u
(dingir) Jnnanna-Edin (Hommel)
2. Vr-{dingir) En-lil Ur- Enlil
3. dam-kar-gal the damlcargal
4. a-mu-iub presented it.
That this inscription belongs to this period, see above, p. 19. Ba'u, see
Br. 11084, ^s called there the be-el-tum mu^bal-lil-ta-at mi-i-ti, which does
not mean ' the goddess who destroys life ' (Hilprecht), but ' the goddess
who restores the dead to life ' — a difference ! See O. B. I. p. 252, note ^.
For dam-kar-gal see Hilprecht, O. B. I. p. 262, note 6, = 'the chief agent';
a-mu-iub, see Lugalzaggisi, iii. 40, note.
This inscription is found on a stele with human figures on it, ' which show
the characteristic features of a mixed race.' Hilprecht promptly concludes :
' The Semites must have been at this time in the country.'
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 45
The inscription of this oldest of all kings reads ;
O. B. I. No. 90.
Comp. Hilprecht, 1. c. p. 264, note i, and Winckler, A. F. p. 372.
f.Dingir) JEn-lil i.e. To Enlil,
lugal kur-kur-ra king of the lands,
En-lag-kui-an-na Enshagkushanna,
en Ki-en-gi lord of Kengi,
5 lugal king of
O, B. I. No. 91.
Uivgtri En-lil-la To Enlil
En-lag-kul-an-na Enshagkushanna
. . . ga K^->'i [the spoijl of Kish
90, 1. 4. Ki-en-gi, according to ii. R. 39, 9 ; v. R. 29, 45-47; A. O. V. 1887,
p. 20, No. 7, means = mdiu, 'land, lowland.' See also V. A. Th. 276, 2460,
where Ki-en-gi-ra (the RA not being post-position) is also translated by
mora-tum. The meaning of Ki-en-gi, ' the land of canals and reeds '
(Hilprecht, O. B. I. p. 252, note 9), rests solely on the supposition —
(1) that Ki-en-gi is = Ki-e-gi; (2) that e-gi are the constituents oi kalam;
see Lngalzaggisi, col. iii. 29. According to Delitzsch, on the other hand,
Ki-en-gi would mean, 'das Land des grossejt Gefilges von Leuten' In
the bilingual inscriptions of Hammurabi the expression Ki-en-gi-^'- Urdu is
translated by : mdta Sumeri u Akkadi. On account of which translation
scholars have derived ' Sumer' from 'Ki-en-gi,' or ' Ki-en-gin.' SeeLehmann,
SamaSiumukln, p. 86; Hommel, Geschichte, p. 234, note i ; and especially
further below, sub ' Shumer and Akkad.'
O. B. I. No. 92.
dig-ga Kfi-^' the spoil of Kish,
^ul-lag wicked of heart,
a-mu-na-lub he presented.
92, 1. 1, dig-ga, Br. 6320, nardbu, H. W. B. 48o = that which is torn off =spoil.
Br. 5324, rukku, H. W. B. f>2'] = Beutestilcke, TributstUcke.
2. gul=igi + ur=inu + nairu=eye + evil, inimical. Delitzsch, Schriftsyst,
p. 49.
These three fragments apparently supplement each other. The
complete text probably ran as follows : To Enlil, the king of the
46 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
lands, Enshagkushanna, lord of Kengi, king of . . ., presented
the spoil of Kish, wicked of heart.
Few as the historical notices are, yet they enable us to get an
insight into the condition of the land and of the people at this
remote time. They show us that a struggle went on between the
south (Kengi) and the north (Kish), which struggle lasted undoubtedly
for several centuries.
Prominent cities at this time were the capital of Kengi (i.e.
Shirpurla-Girsu, as we shall see later on ; not Erech (Hilprecht) ),
Nippur, and Kish.
It is necessary, however, before tracing the different steps in
the development of Kish, to turn our attention to a kingdom called
in the inscriptions ' Shirpurla.' The inscriptions of the rulers of
this kingdom give us an impression of a power and might which
presuppose centuries for its development. All that we know of its
art ' and civilization tends in the same direction.
The Rulers of Shlrpiirla.
Shirpurla is the modern Tell-Loh (or Telloh), where De Sarzec
found the inscriptions relating to the rulers of this dynasty. It is
situated fifteen hours north of Mugheir, on the east side of the Shatt-
el-Hai, and about twelve hours east of Warka. At this early time
the city of Shirpurla seems to have included four component parts,
viz. Girsu, Nina, Uruazagga, Erim. Thus it happened that one
and the same king might call himself either ' king of Shirpurla '
(comp. Urukagina, Clercq, ii. pi. viii. col. i. 4, 5), or 'king of
Girsu ' (comp. Barrel-Cyl., col. i. 4, 5). These suburbs were built
by various rulers in honour of their favourite gods or goddesses.
Whether Shirpurla is the right reading, or Sirgulla (Hommel),we do
• See the so-called ' Vase d' Argent ' in D^c. pi. 43 "«, with the emblem of
Shirpurla : the lion-headed eagle with outspread wings, having put its clutches
into the back of two lions, whose hinder parts are turned towards each other.
Sometimes this eagle appears alone. See Heuzey, Les Armoiries Chald^ennes.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 47
not know. According to Pinches, Guide to the Kouyunjik Gallery,
p. 7, London, 1883, and Babyl. Records, iii. p. 24, Shirpurla may
be read Lagash, which reading is adopted throughout by Jensen
in K. B. iii\ We retain the old reading Shirpurla, because this
writing occurs most frequently in the monuments.
The rulers of Shirpurla may conveniently be grouped under four
divisions :
(i) The dynasty of Urukagina — beginning with this ruler or
his predecessor(s) ' and ending with Lugalshuggur and his suc-
cessor(s).
(2) The dynasty of Ur-Nind, ending with Lummadur.
(3) The patesis between Lummadur and Ur-Ba'u.
(4) Ur-Ba'u and his successors, ending with Gala-Lama.
Dynasty of Urukagina.
To Urukagina^, the oldest member of the first dynasty of Shirpurla,
we have assigned the approximate date of 4500 b.c. His greatness
consisted not so much in successful wars against the neighbouring
cities, as in securing a peaceful administration for his country and
■ It is very probable that Urukagina had some predecessors. The classifica-
tion is made only on the basis of the inscriptions so far extant. It also may be
possible that Engegal preceded Urukagina. Without being able to prove either
one or the other, we content ourselves with the above-given arrangement.
^ For the meaning of this name, see note to 1. 39 of D^c. pi. 5, No. i. His
inscriptions are ;
Clercq, ii. pi, viii., translated by Oppert, ibid. pp. 72, 77 ; see also Oppert,
Acad, des Inscriptions, 1884, fevrier; Amiand, R. P. i. p. 68, and Dec.
p. XXX. ; Hommel, Z. K. ii. p. 182 ; Hal^vy, R. Arch. 1884, i. 109 ff.
Pierre de Seuil, Dec. 5, fig. i ; Amiand, ibid. p. xxx. ; R. P. i. 69 f.
Barrel-Cylinder, Dec. 32; Amiaud, ibid. p. xxx., and R. P. i. p. 17 ff. ;
Jensen, K. B. iii '. p. 10.
British Museum, A. H. 82, 7-14; comp. Winckler, Untersuchungen, p. 43, A. i,
now published in C. T. No. 12030 (part vii. p. 3).
Winckler, A. B. K. No. i.
R. A. iv. No. iii. pi. iii. No. 8.
About a Cone not yet published, see Heuzey, Comptes Rendns, 1879, p. 428 ff.,
and Thureau-Dangin, preface to E. C.
48 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
city. As 'king of Girsu-Shirpurla,' he devoted his energy to the
building of different storehouses, that should take up ' the abun-
dance of the countries,' and erected temples for different gods — thus
showing his devotion and piety. He built ' for NinS the beloved
canal, the canal Nind-^'-tum-a' and thus supplied his city with water
(see note to D^c. 32, col. iii. 6). Bel of Nippur still exercises
the highest influence. Ningirsu (' the lord of Girsu ') is the chief
city god, under whose control the capital stands. He is the GUD
or ' hero ' of Enlil. In somewhat later inscriptions, Ningirsu has the
title gud lig-ga, ' the strong hero ' of Enlil. Many other gods are
mentioned in his inscriptions; for particulars the reader may be
referred to the inscriptions which follow : —
Clercq, ii. pi. viii. No. i. Comp. Oppert, ibid. pp. 72, 77.
Col. I.
(Dingir) Nin-gir-su For Ningirsu,
gud i''i"sri'-) En-lil-la{T)-ra the hero of Enlil,
Uru-ka-gi-na Urukagina,
^ gal-{ga)lu king
5 Sir-la-pur-^'-ge of Shirpurla,
e-ni his house
mu-na-ru he has built.
e-gal Ti-ra-di-ka-ni The palace of his Tirash
mu-na-ru he has built.
Col. n.
An-ta-sur-(rd)-ra The Antasurra
I. 8. Tirash is called in D^c. 2, i, col. iii. i ; D^c. 5, 1, 1. 9, only ^. Comp.
also Bairel-Cyl. i. 6-9. See also the proper name, Lugal-Tirdi (Ur IV.).
II. 1. An-ta-sur-ra is explained in the Barrel-Cyl. col. i. 1. 7 and in D^c. 5,
I, 1. 7, by e-ge-ghl-kalam-ma, ' the house of the abundance of the lands.' The
first RA seems to be an erasure. Comp. also C6ne of Entemena, col. iv.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 49
mu-na-ru he has built.
E-gil-me-ra The Egishmera
e-ne-U-kur-kur-ra-ku to be an Enebi-kurkura
5 mu-na-ru he has built.
E-KA&-^GAR-M KAK-gal- His storehouse
kur-ta-DU-a
mu-na-ru , he has built.
(dingir) Dun4ag-ga-na-ra For his god Dunshagga
ki-akhil the Kiakkil
Col. III.
mu-na-ru he has built.
(dingir) Ghl-alim-ma-ra For Galalim
30, and Galet A of Eannatum, col. v. 2-7 ; vi. 21 ; vii. 2. This Antasurra
seems to have been a very celebrated storehouse, for we find its name even at
the time of Ur IV. ; comp. E. A. H. 91.
3. E-gii-me-ra is explained here by E-tie-bi-kur-kur-ra ; comp. D^c. 5, I,
!'• 33) 34. where we have E-me-ne-bi-kur-kur-ra explaining E-bar-ra. It seems
therefore probable that, if E-ne-bi-kur-kur-ra = E-me-ne-bi-kur-kur-ra, E-gii-
me-ra = E-bar-ra. In 'Tablette A' of Entemena, R. A. ii. pp. 148, 149, rev.,
col. i. 1,2, E-me-ne-bi-kur-kur-ra eyi'^hiiusAn-ta-sur-ra. "BxA An-la-sur-ra is
explained above (note to col. ii. i) by e-ge-ghl-kalam.-ma; hence E-{me)-ne-bi-kur-
kur-ra has the same meaning as e-^e-gd.l-kalam^ma, i. e. ' house of the abundance
of the lands,' and because E-gii-me-ra = E-bdrra^ An-ta-sur-ra, it follows
that all three are similar buildings. See also R. A. iii. p. 120, note i, and
especially Barrel-Cyl. i. 6-9.
6. The second sign is ICAS (bi) + inserted GAU ; see also Dec 6, 4 ;
Jensen, K. B. iii'. p. j8, note 2, ' Nahrungshaus' ; Thureau-Dangin, ' maison
de vivre' R. A. iii. p. 119. Comp. also 'Tablette A' of Entemena, rev.,
iii. 3.
The expression KAK-gal-kur-ia-DV-a is difficult.
KAK=du, Br. 5256; kalil, H. W. B. p. 329: ' Gesammiheit' gal, Br.
6841 ; butukiu, H. W. B. p. 191 ; ' Oberflutung' =fig. for ^igallu.
Zi« = iii' otaldku, H. W. B. p. 68.
We might translate : his storehouse {e-kai-gar-bi), which bringeth {DU) all
{KAK) the abundance (gat) into the land {kur-td) ; or better : ' into which goeth
all the abundance of the land.' Amiaud : ^qui metTabondance (?) dans le pays'
9. See Gudea votive tablet 8, Br. 2708 : ikkillu, H. W. B. p. 55 : ' the house
of lamentation.'
III. 2. alim, T. C. 208 ; Br. 8882.
£
50 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
E-ine-gal-M(^uf)-an-M the Emegalkishanki
mu-na-ru he has built.
5 ^-(<*V'»') Ba-u The house of Ba'u
mu-na-ru he has built.
(dingir) En-lil-la For Enlil
E-ad-da the Eadda
tm-sag-ga-ka-ni of his imsagga
Col. IV.
mu-na-ru he has built.
Bur-sag The great ' Vase,'
E-SA-DUG an-na-U-ni-ga-sag-a the house of the sattAku, the top
of which goeth very high,
mu-na-ru he has built.
5 Uru-ka-gi-na Urukagina,
gal-{ga)lu king
Sir-la-^'-pur of Shirpuria,
(gd)lu E-ninnH - who the Eninnfl
3. kii, T. C. 304 ; ^f, T. C. 206 ; these two signs have been very often
confonnded. The whole expression may signify : bit ma'dAti rahtti "ia kiiiat
'iaml ii irsiti.
8, 9. Comp. Tablette A of Entemena, rev. i. 5, 6.
IV. 3. E-SA-DUG, written E-DI-KA, see H. W. B. p. 513 : di-ka =
sa-dug=sattiiku, sattukku, 'festgesetzte Tempdabgabe^ an-na-bi-ni-ga-sag-a
may mean: high (an-na-bi ; bi=aAv. Br. 5139) goeth {ni-ga, Br. 6108) its
top {sag-d). Amiaud translates the whole line : ' son temple qui s^ dlhie jusqii h
tapproche des deux ? ' Comp. D^c. 5, i, 1. 13.
8. E-ninnA, i.e. ' the house of the number 50.' Fifty is the sacred number
for Ningirsu-Ninib, see v. R. 37, 18. This Eninnft is also said (D^c. 1, 8,
col. iii. 6) to be that of ^dingir) Im-gififni)gu-bar-bar, which Jensen, K. B. iii '.
p. 23, note *t, explains as the house of that god ' welcher den finstem igii)
Himmel (im) erhellen {bar-bar) mdge{^u),und spielt aufNinib ah die Friihsonne
an' That this was the temple of Ningirsu-Ninib is evident from Gudea B,
V. 13 ff. ; (dingir) Nin-gir-su lugal-a-ni nig-du-e pa-mu-na-ad-du E-Ninn&-
(dingir) Im-gig-bar-bar-ro-ni mu-na-ru ; comp. also Gudea D, ii. 7 (D^c. 9).
It had a so-called gi-gunu, which was built out of cedar-wood : Gudea B, v.
18 ; D, ii. 9 ; Jensen, K. B. iii '. p. 33, note f *. Gudea, Ur-Ningirsu, and some
later patesis repair the Eninnfl as well as the gi-gunu, D&. 37, 9, ii. 5.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
51
ru-a
10 dingir-ra-ni
{dinjrtr) ]S!in-Sul-li{t)
nam-ti-la-ni-ku
ud-ul-la-ku
{dingir) Nin-gir-su-ra
6 ka-M-^e-na-ghl
has built,
his god
Col. V.
is Ninshuli.
For (the preservation of) his life
for ever
' to Ningirsu
may he bow down his face.
V. I. Amiaud : (.Oingir) Nin-shul (ou Nin-doun).
3. ud-ul-la-ku = ana ^m^ ulMH = Semitism,
5. ka-U-g&l, Br. 714 ; H. W. B. i(i^ = appa lab&nu.
gina, not Ninshul (Amiaud).
The subject is Uruka-
10
13
URUKAGINA.
(Bloc de seuil ou de support.)
D^c. pi. 5, No. I . Comp. Amiaud, D^c. p. xxx.
[Dingir Nin-su-gir]
[gud En\-lil-\ld]-ra
[ Uru\-ka-\^t]-na
{lti]gal
\Gir-sti\-^'-ra
\An-la\-sur-ra
\Ey^e-ghl-\kalani\-ma-ni
mu-na-ru
\E-gaT\ Ti-\ra-af\-ka-ni
\mu-na-ru
[2 lines mutilated]
(dinsir) Ghl-alim-ma
e. For Ningirsu,
the hero of Enlil,
Urukagfina
the king
of Girsu,
the Antasurra,
the house of the abundance
of his lands,
he has built.
The house of his Tirash
he has built
For Galalimma
6. See le Clercq, col. ii. i.
9. See le Clercq, col. i. 8, where it is called e-gal, the ' great house ' {sic)
not ' temple ' ; comp. Barrel-Cyl., col. i. 1. 8.
13. After this line we probably have to supply, according to le Clercq,
col, iii. 3 : E-tne-gal-kii (or hetter ^ui ?)-an-ki.
£ 2
52
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
[3 lines mutilated]
n
23
25
30
36
40
[3 lines mutilated]
[mu\-na-ru
WngiA JSfin-sar
sag ?-lal
(dtngir) Nin-gir-su-ka-ra
e-ni
mu-na-ru
ldingir\ gif
\kf\-ag
(dingtr) Mn-gir-su-ra
e-ni
mu-na-ru
idingiri Nin-gir-su-ra
E-bar-ra
-me-ne{lam)-[b{\-kur-kur-ra
mu-na-ru
e-ab
(dingtr) ISIin-gir-su-ra
mu-ru
Uru-ka-gi-na
(ga)lu e
(dingir) Nin-gir-su
\ru-d\
he has built.
For Ninsar,
the iag?-lal
of Ningirsu,
his house
he has built.
For gir,
the beloved
of Ningirsu,
his house
he has built.
For Ningirsu
the Ebarra (sanctuary),
the Emenebikurkura,
he has built.
The E-ab ....
for Ningirsu
he has built.
Urukagina,
who the house
of Ningirsu
has built.
It is explained here by E-me-nc-
and note to it. It wonld seem.
33. The first sign=jfa^? ' heart-bearer '? = beloved ? Amiand, parte-
[glaive ?].
33. bar='Y.C. 1 25 = sanctuary (/ara(J/5«).
bi-kur-kur-ra ; comp. le Clercq, col. ii. 3, 4,
therefore, that Egishmera is a sanctuary.
39. Means : city {uru), mouth {ka), true (^«a) = the city of the true mouth.
Jensen : ' Staclt der Wahrheit ' oder ' in der Stadt ist Wahrheit ' (?).
43 ff. Have probably to be supplied according to le Clercq, col. iv. 10 and
col. v.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
53
(Barrel-Cylinder.)
D^c. 32. Comp. Amiaud, D^c. pp. xxx and xxxi.
Col. I.
^Din^ir Nin-gtr-su\
\gud\ ^'"sir^ En-Sjil-layra
Uru-ka-gi-na
gal+(ga)lu
Gir-su-^'-ge
An-ta-sur-ra
E-^e-ghl-kalam-ma-ni
e-gal Ti-ra-ai-ka-ni
mu-na-ru
[mu-na]-ru
i. e. For Ningirsu
the hero of Enlil,
Urukagina,
king
of Girsu,
the Antasurra,
his house of the abundance
of land(s),
(and) the great house of his Tirash,
he has built.
The house of Ba'u
he has built.
Col. II.
mu-[na-ru]
{dingir) [Dun-hg'j-ga-lfia-ra]
kz-\akMr\
5 mu-[na-ru\
(dingir) .... ^ag ....
gis .... la-tug f
e-ni mu-tia-ru
lag-ba
[o f.''*''^^*-') Za-za-ru
{dingir) Im-pa-ud-du
i. e. he has built.
For his god Dunshagga
the Kiakkil
he has built.
For .... lag ....
the hero (giS) f . . . . ha-tug ?
his house he has built.
In its midst
for 7^&%zx\3l,
Impauddu,
I. 3-5. Urukagina calls himself ' king of Girsn.' So probably also in Dec. 5,
No. I, while in le Clercq, ii. pi. viii. col. i. 1. 5, he has the title • king of Shiipurla.'
Girsn and Shirpurla are therefore only two different names for the same place I
8. The e-gal Ti-ra-cH-ka-ni here seems to be co-ordinate to Antasurra, and has
therefore to be translated as above. Comp. also le Clercq, cols. i. and ii.
II. 10. dingir Za-za-uru {sic). Comp. this with Gudea, Cyl. B, col. xi. 4 in
R. A. ii. p. 134, where this very same god is written {dingir) Za-za-RU. This
proves that URU has also the phonetic value RV. Comp. also ' kur-kur-
54- EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
(dingir) Gim-nun-ta-ud-du-a Gimnuntauddua,
e-^mu + ne^ ni + ru their apartments he has built.
(dingir) ]Sfin-sar For Ninsar,
15 [ . . . . di»gi'-'\ Nin-su- the ... . of Ningirsu
\gir\-ra (comp. D^c. 5, 1. 22, 60).
Col. III.
\^dingir) En-Hl-la] i. e. For Enlil
\e-d]d-da\{\m-sag-ga-ka-ni the Eadda of his imsagga
mu-na-ru he has built.
{dingir) JSfind For Niui
5 id ki-ag-ga-ni her beloved canal,
(»■'=') Nind-^^-tum-a the canal ' Nind ^'-tum-al
?-mu-na-ru he has built.
ka-ba e . . . . At its mouth a house
ni ....
iQ na . . . ud . . . . ....
mu he [has built].
12 ff.
To this oldest dynasty of Shirpurla belongs also a certain
Engegal (' lord of abundance ' or ' very rich ' '). He, like Urukagina,
URV=kur-kur-ru, Galet A of Eannatnin, iv. 33; dingir-dingir-URU =
dingir-dingir-ru. Cone of Entemena, i. 3. This very same sign is also used
as a verbal prefix (for RA T), especially when preceded by mu ; comp. Lugal-
raggisi, ii. 32.
III. 5. id, Br. ii647 = K(fr«.
6. Has the name of this canal to be translated : ' that goeth out from NinS. ' ?
Thus it would be a proof that Nind^i, another part of Girsu-Shirpurla, existed
as early as this. Hommel, P. S. B. A. 1895, p. 207, proposes to read for
Nin&M = Ghanna-ki , in order to identify this city with the Biblical t]^3n, which
was built by Cain for his son Khan&k, Gen. iv. 17.
7. The first sign is that of T. C. 91 {at), without the last stroke, or is it =
NI-TUG = rcd)^
1 2 ff. Amiaud adds : ' Restent encore les fragments de quatre colonnes, dont
il ne nC est fas possible de donner une traduction.'
' This king is only known from a communication of Hilprecht in Z. A. :
P- 33°-
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 55
calls himself ' lugal Pur-lir-la \' ' king of Shirpurla.' Besides
this he bears the proud title 'lugal ki-gal-la,' 'the great king,'
and terms himself h'6 {'^'"s^''') Nin-gir-su, ' the priest of Ningirsu,'
a title similar to that of patesi-gal. From the title ' the great king '
we may venture to conclude that he, unlike his predecessor, must
have carried his arms successfully against his enemies '■', who had
previously succeeded in plunderiiig Shirpurla, but fate decreed that
his royal capital should be reduced to the seat of a patesi. Kish,
having been defeated some time before by Enshagkushanna, seems
to have acquired new strength. Its king, Mesilim ", became lord
paramount of Shirpurla, thus reducing its rulers to mere patesis *.
' Thus the name is written in this inscription according to Hilprecht. Comp.
also the same or similar sequence of signs in the inscriptions of Ur-Nini, &c.
' That is, against Kish. This is probably indicated by O. B. I. Nos. 108,
109 (Hilprecht, ibid. p. 263, 2), where we have an inscription of a certain U-dug?,
patesi of Kish, who presents {sag [ku] mu-[J>a]-kab-[du] = ana sirikti isruk,
O. B. I. 109, 4) certain things to idingir) Za-[ma-ma'\.
' See his inscription on p. 16. For a more detailed account of this king's
power, see C6ne of Entemena.
* In this sense I take patesi with Winckler, Altorientalische Forschungen,
iii. p. 234 : ' die gebrduchliche Bezeichnung fiir die unterworfenen Konige ist in
Babylonien patesi^
What patesi really means we do not know. Two explanations may be
offered :
(i) It means ' one that is filled {si) with power (/a).'
PA = {d) staff, sceptre, (4) name of any higher <iSi<xx=Hiiru, aklu.
^/=horn, sign of fullness, strength, then ' to fill.'
TE=ta (?), prefix which helps to form the conjugation.
(3) Or : a governing, leading "sApiru =^SD.
PA=Upiru.
Sl—iuttiuru, ' to govern, to lead.'
T£=ia.{see Jensen, K. B. iii'. p. 6).
The difficulty, however, with both of these explanations is, that it is not yet
proven that TE^TA.
The Assyrians translated pa-te-si as, well as .57 by i'Siakku. In inscriptions
the following patesis are mentioned : —
Patesi of a god.
Patesi of a city.
Patesi of a king.
Patesi of men in general.
56 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
The name of only one of these earliest patesis is preserved to us,
i.e. Lugal-^ug-gur^, who is mentioned in the inscription of
Mesilim. The sovereignty of Kish over Shirpurla does not seem
to have lasted very long ^ Shirpurla regained its former glory
under a new dynasty, namely, that of Ur-Nina.
Dynasty of Ur -Nina.
With Ur-Nind begins a new dynasty, probably the mightiest
of Early Babylonia, the duration of its sovereignty extending from
4300 B.C. to 4100 B.C. Looking at the art and the inscriptions
of these kings, we cannot help thinking that in Shirpurla civiUza-
tion must have been far advanced, so far advanced as to force
upon us the conclusion that ' several centuries have elapsed before
men could reach this stage of civilization.' The greater number
of these art treasures are preserved in the Louvre ; the inscriptions
found on them have been published in Ddcouvertes en Chald^e and
in the Revue d'Assyriologie.
Patesi of a so-called Mt Hmi.
Patesi of a ' festival.'
From the fact that kings (Jugal) very often term themselves patesi or
patesi-gal of a certain god, it seems to be evident that patesi in the first
place is purely a religious title, signifying the highest official of a god, having
the. care of that god's temple and jurisdiction over that territory, over which
the god extends his influence. It is, however, evident that patesi, apart from
its religious sense, has also its ' secular meaning.' On page 7 we heard of
an inscription of Naram-Sin, in which a certain Lugalushumgal, who was
patesi of Shirpurla, is called 'scribe' (="ISD = Mpiru) and servant, thus
clearly indicating that this patesi was dependent on Naram-Sin, and was a mere
secular official. The argument of Hilprecht in O. B. I. pp. 262, 263 and
note I, is precarious, because based on an incorrect translation of the inscription
of Mesilim.
' Thus this name should probably be pronounced (R. A. iv. p. 35). As such
it is equivalent to Lugal-kurum (Br. 9929) -zikum- (Br. 10219), (Hilprecht,
O. B. I. p. 263, note i). Thureau-Dangin (R. A. iv. p. 70, note 9) proposes to
read Lugal-'iag-gur.
^ Only one other king of Kish has come down to us, who belongs to this
period. This king is Lugal-da ?-ak ?, lugal Kfi ; see R. A. iv. p. iii.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 57
The first king of this dynasty was Ur-Nini ' (servant of Nina).
The dynasty of Urukagina must have been reduced to mere
nothingness by the kings of Kish, so that Ur-NinS found it easy to
take possession of the throne. He must have been of an old
family, for he mentions the name of his father and grandfather, who
have the title neither of patesi nor of king. He, like his predeces-
sors, seems to have been great in peace. He built temples and
various storehouses. A passage in his inscriptions (viz. D^c.
ater^ No. 2, col. iv. 5, 6; comp. D^c. 2, No. i, col. iv. 4, 5),
where he records the building of the ' wall of Shirpurla,' suggests
that the old enemy, Kish, was still troublesome, so that he found it
necessary to fortify his capital against the deadly enemies from
the north. For further details see the inscriptions which follow.
• Hommel (Geschichte, p. 284) read this name Ur-Ghanna, in order to
identify him with the old Orchamus in Ovid, Metamorph. 4, 212 Q Rexit
Achaemenias urbes pater Orchamus ; isque septimus a prisci numeratur
origine BeW); now he reads it Kalab-Ghanna, see P. S. B. A. 1899, p. 132,
and ibid. 1895, p. 207. Jensen, K. B. iii'. p. 10, note 3, says that this
reading ' entbehrt jeglichen Grundes.'
His inscriptions are :
Dec. pi. 3, No. I ; see Jensen, K. B. iii '. p. 10 £f. ; Hommel, Geschichte,
p. 287. (The translation and transcription of Jensen are based upon the whole
literature which preceded his, an account of which is there given.)
Dee. pi. 2, No. 2 ; Jensen, ibid. p. 14 ; A. B. K. No. i.
Dec. pi. I, No. 2 ; Jensen, ibid. p. 14 ; Hommel, Geschichte, p. 285.
Dte. pi. 2'"', Nos. I and 2; see R. A. iii. 13 ff. and R. A. iv. p. 103
(Ur-Nina and his family).
Dec. pi. 2^, No. I ; see R. A. iii. 18 ff. (Heuzey).
Dec. pi. 2'«'', No. 2 ; see R. A. ii. 147, Oppert's translation, ibid.
Dec. pi. i^^, No. 4, and R. A. iv. p. 98.
Dec. pi. 31, i (brick).; R. A. iv, 91 ; see R. A. ii. 85 (Oppert).
See also R. A. iii. 13 ff. (Nouveaux Monuments du roi Ur-NinS, par Leon
Heuzey).
R. A. ii. 78, Genealogies de Sirpourla, par Leon Heuzey; comp. with this
R. A. iiL p. 32 ff., by the same author.
D^c. 26*", fig. 4.
R. A. iv. 87 ff., and especially ibid. pp. 97 and 122, i ; p. 105, fig. lo a, * ;
p. 106, fig. II ; p. 114, fig. 22 (L. Heuzey).
R. A. V. 26 (L. Heuzey).
L. Heuzey, Les Ajmoiries Chalddennes de Shirpurla.
58 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
UR-NINA.
Ddc. 2ter, 4.
(Dingir) JSfind-^ UR Ur-NinS,
gal-\- {ga)lu king
^ir-pur-la of Shirpurla,
(/«»2« Gu-ni-du the son of Gunidu
5 dumu Gur-sar son of Gursar,
E-Nin-su-gir-^'''"£''''i the house of Ningirsu
mu-ru he has built.
_£■ (dinffir) jsfind The house of Nini
mu-ru he has built.
10 E-Ga-tum-dug-^(^'''e'r) The house of Gatumdug
mu-ru he has built.
I. Read Ur-Kdingir) Nind, andcomp. gal+{ga)lu = king. Eannatnm writes
always Ur-idingir) Nind. It means ' servant of Ninil.' NinS is the sign ab,
+ inserted ia >= fish, the later ideogram for the Assyrian capital, Nineveh ; it
may be pronounced either NinS, or Ninua.
3. Sir-fur-la without ki\ So also in Dec. 2^', No. 2, col. i.
4. Gu-ni-du : so has to be read, not Ni-gal-ni-du (Jensen) or Ni-ni-gal-din
(Amiaud) ; comp. Thureau-Dangin, R. S. 1897, p. 273, note 8. Ni+^al
when written together is gu.
6. Very interesting is the sequence of the signs in this line, i. c. Nin + su +
gir. The same sequence also occurs in D^c. pi. 2, i ; see Jensen, K. B. iii',
p. 10, col. i. £. This name generally is written Nin-gir-su. The sign SU
may also be pronovinced SU N iJiiovsaa&\, S. L. No. 7). It is possible, there-
fore, that the original name of the god from whom the city got its name (or
vice versa) was Nin-sun-gir, and the city originally was called Sun-gir.
Whether the latter reading or that of Girsu is the correct one cannot be made
out at the present, but compare what has been said about the title ' king of
Shnmer and Akkad.' On account of the sequence SU{N)-gir, some scholars
wish to derive from it the later ' Shumer,' which in the bilingual texts of
Hammurabi translates the word Kengi (see under Enshagkushanna, p. 45,
note 4). For a derivation of Shtmier from Sungir we could refer to the
Hebrew "IWIf, Gen. *. 10, which should be pointed IJfJE' (?). For the pro-
nunciation of Hebrew V as g, comp. mbj? LXX. T6iiopp'a.
10. Jensen reads her name Ga-sig Q zib,zib, Slc.) -dug ; comp. Gudea B,
col. ii. 17, and note 2; K. B. iii'. p. 28. She is the mother of Shirpurla ;
comp. Gudea B, col. viii, 56 : am Sirfurla-ki azagidingir) Ga-tum-dug; and
as such she would be the same as '■dingir) Bdu, see above, p. 21.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 59
e-dam The house of his wife
mu-ru he has built.
E-Nin-Mar->'* Jr K<ii»sif) The house of the Nin-Mar-k*
15 mu-ru he has built,
Mh-al From Ma'al
kur-ta the mountain,
gu-gal-gil-MU with all kinds of wood,
12. The same building occurs also in Dec. pi. 2, No. i, col. ii. 5. Jensen,
K. B. iii'. p. 12, makes a note of interrogation for the second sign. Oppert
reads it = 'AS'; comp. R. A. ii. 14^, but the miore probable reading is
DAM = aSiatu, ^trta.
14. (dingir) Mn-Mar-ii, i. e. the mistress of ' Mar ' (a city). She is the ' first-
born of NinS'; comp. Ur-Ba'u, Dec. 7, 8, col. v. 8 : dumu- sag (dingir) Mnd-ra.
16-19. The interpretation of these lines is rather difficult, owing to the
difficulty of identifying the second sign in 1. 16 and the correct interpretation
of the phrase gu-ghl-gii-MU.
Amiaud (R. P ". i. p. 65), Oppert (R. A. ii.p. 147), and Heuzey (R. A. iii. p. 17,
and D^c. p. 170) read this sign GAN^KAN), thus identifying it with that to
be found in Gudea D (Dec. pi. 9) : Mct-GAN^i. Jensen, in K. B. iii'. p. 12,
simply gives a ' ?.' Hilprecht (O. B. I. p. 253, note i) transcribes this sign
by GIS-DIN, and reads and translates Dec. 2, i, col. iv. 10 ff., as follows : —
ma gii-din kura-ta gu-gii-ghl mu-tum ? i. e. 'a ship (laden) with wine he
brought from the country which possesses every kind of tree.' Thnreau-
Dangin, on the other hand, identified this sign with AL (R. A. iv. p. 71,
note i). In E. C. No. 325 he, however, leaves it unidentified, but comp. also
E. C. No. 377. That Hilprecht's proposed explanation cannot be correct is
evident from a comparison of all those places of Ur-Nin^'s inscriptions where
this same sign occurs :
R. A. iv. p. 105 6 : i, mi-[al] ; 2, kur-[ia] ; Z> S" ■ • •
Dec. 2, I, iv. I ff. :
I, m^al; j, kur-Ja; 3, gu-gU-gH-mu (sic\ nothing else); 4, bad pur-la-
Ur; 5, mu-ru.
D^c. 2^", i, v. 3 ff. :
3, mh-al; 4, kur-ta; i^gu ■¥ gii + ghl; 6, mu — ? { = lalV)
Dec. 2'''8, I, lower half :
mi.-al I kur-ta gu-ghl-gi'i-mu \ D U-D U,
And especially the passage in question (D^c. 2^^, 4, 16 ff.) :
16, mi.-al;\'j, kur-ta; 1%, gu-gitl-gii-mu ; \^, Ib-gal; 20, mu-ru.
How would Hilprecht translate this passage ? Line 18 shows that that
scholar's emendation (viz. to read turn (?) after mu) is without warrant. If
we had to supply a verb after MU we would — according to the analogy
6o EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
Ib-gal the Ibgal
20 mu-ru he has built.
Dul-nir The Dulnir
mu-ru he has built.
of the inscription above referred to, and according to Dec. 2"=, i — expect
MU-TUM (V) to form a line by itself; bnt it does not.
Dismissing, therefore, Hilprecht's emendation, we could translate this passage
— again if that scholar's assimilation of AL = GIS-DIN is correct — only as
follows : — [With] a ship (laden) with wine from the country which possesses
every kind of tree he bnilt the Ibgal. But this is absurd. The TA in line
17 has to be connected with line 16, which latter line contains the name of the
KURy and therefore line 16 has to be read mh-al : ' from (id) MA-AL the
mountain.' GU = Br. 3230, naf^aru; ghl = bdiA; but how is the MU
to be explained ? Hilprecht (personal communication) sees in this MU some
kind of a participial construction, and wants to translate : ' From Mcl-al the
moimtain all kinds of wood having MU ( = brought),' thus supplying for MU
an unknown meaning. The correct interpretation of this passage is given on
hand by Gudea D, iv. 6 ff. : For Gndea . . . Magan, &c. . . . gu-gii mu-na-ghl-
la-a-an mhgii ru-a-bi Sir-fur-la-^'-iu mu-na-tum, which can be translated only
(against Jensen, K. B. iii', p. 53, and Hilprecht, O. B. I. 253, i) by : ' For
Gudea have brought Magan, &c. — each of which {a-an) possesses every kind of
tree— a ship (laden) with wood (for) his {bi) buildings in (or to) Shirpurla.'
gu-gd,l-gii-mu therefore has to be read gti-gii mu-g&l; comp. D^c. 2*«'', 2, v.
3 ff. Such transpositions occur very often in our texts : D^c. 3'", D \ col. 1,8:
bal-mu-e = mu-bal-e, ibid. 1. 3 ; D^c. 32,11.13; e + mu + ne + ni-vru = e-ne-ni
mu-ru; comp. also D^c. 31, i ; D^c. 3 A ii. { — ud-da inim-ba ni-iu-bal-e);
Lugalzaggisi, ui. 33.
Our whole passage must therefore be translated as has been done above, and
its meaning is : he built the Ibgal with all kinds of wood (which is or comes)
from the Ma'al mountain. Dec. 2, i, iv. 1 ff. can be rendered only by : ' with
, all kinds of wood (which is) from the Ma'al mountain he has built the wall of
Shirpurla.'
Line 6 in Dec. 2'", v., has to be completed according to D^c. 2*'', i, i. e. has
to be read mu-D U= Shaphel, or probably also mu-lal ( = sabdtu).
It would seem, if we compare E. C. 325 with E. C. 377, that both these
signs are identical, but differ essentially from the sign GAN. The sign AL
occurs also in A. F. p. 545, No. 4, 1. 3.
19. Ib-gal, Jensen, 1. c. 'Innenraum ? ' ; comp. D^c. ;:, i, col. i. 7. Also
mentioned in A. V. 2100.
21. The Dul-nir mentioned here, and R. A. iv. p. 122, 5, 1. 13, and in
Dec. 2, I, ii. 1, may be read also KI-U ; so at least here I U, Br. 6025,
r^lu = ' place of pasture ' = pasture. Comp. Jensen, K. B. iii^ p. 12, note i.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
6l
E-pa
mu-ru
The Epa
he has built.
23. Occurs also in Ddc. 2, i, ii. 7, and D^c. 2^', No. 2, col. iv. 3, and is
explained in Gudea D, col. ii. 11, and in Gudea G, i. 13, as the e-ub imin-na
(Jensen: ' Siebenweltraumhaus,' K. B. iii^ p. 51, note **°, and Kosmologie,
p. 201 ff.) of Ningirsu.
Ddc. pi. 2ter No. 2.
(Dingir) Nind-UR
lugal
Sir-pur-la
dumu Gu-ni-du
dumu Gur-sar
E-Nind-^^'"?''')
[fUngir) ]\J'ind
mu-iu
min alan (?)
mu-dun
Col. I.
Ur-NinI,
king
of Shirpurla,
the son of Gunidu,
son of Gursar,
the house of Nint
has built.
Col. II.
The (image of) Nina
he has renewed,
2 statues
he has digged (= cut, carved,
sculptured) ;
II. i. mu-tu; tu evidently the sign in T. C. 179; it occurs again in
Dec. 2, No. I, col. V. 2. Jensen transcribes it with tur, and thinks it is that
given in T. C. 181— 'but wrongly, tu, Br. io6Q=ed0u, H. W. B. p. 30. In
connection with this compare such expressions as ' salam ildni rahAte uddii,'
or ' an^usunu uddH'; also used of temples, ' udduhi eirHim.' Here un-
doubtedly the former meaning is the correct one, viz. = ' salam NinS, uddii!
Jensen translates 'hat kineingebracht! "D&c pi. z, No. i, col. v. i, 2, ought
to be translated: 'the house {e = eir^tim) of NinS the mistress he renewed.'
Oppert, R. A. ii. p. 147, ' il a sculpti la diesse Nind.'
3. alan 1 So Amiaud and Jensen. Thureau-Dangin, E. C. 107 : 'probably
identical with alan.'
4. The second sign is here clearly that of T. C. 1 88. It is also found in
Dec. 2, No. 1, col. v. 4. Jensen ( = aso^, see K. B. iii'. p. 14) and Amiaud
62 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
g [dingir) j^ind NinS's
alan statue
a-mu-na a-ag (?) for the declaring of her (his ?)
name
Col. III.
Ap-ir (on the side of?) the Apir
mu-tu he has renewed.
40 ur 40 servants
dam of his wife
5 (dtnsir) jsfind for Nind
mal-bi-pad that called him to be her prince
(who translates it ' he has set up ' = </« 1) misread it. dun, Br. 9868 = J^irA,
H. W. B. p. 289 = 'to dig' (cut), hence when used of a statue = to sculpture.
So also Oppert, 1. c. D^c. 2, No. i, col. v. 4, has to be translated: 2 statues
he digged, i. e. sculptured, and not as Jensen : hat zwei Statuen ? gereinigt ?
{geweikf) ?
7. armi-na a-ak, written here a + mu + a + ag? ( = a ligature) + na (under it).
If the last but one sign is ag, T. C. 2 — which however is very doubtful, comp.
E. C. 558 — then see Br. 2785 and H. W. B. p. 44J : nabii. The '«»' then
would be the pronominal sufhx to mu, or the prefix to ag. It ought to be
translated : (Of) NinS a statue to declare her name (on the side of) the Apir
he renewed. The na, however, may also refer to the king himself. Oppert
translates : ' {II a sculpti la diesse Nind) : deux statues four ciUbrer le nam de
Nind, une statue d cM du iassin Ap-ir, il les a sculpt^es.' How he substantiates
this translation is not clear.
III. 1. The Ap-ir is probably a similar construction to the au-ab-gal,
D^c. 2, 1, col. iii. 6, or the zu-ab-tur-da, T)ic. 2, I, col. iv. 6 ; D^c. 2^ex,
No. 1. Comp. also the ai-gi in Dec. 31, No. 3, col. iii. 2, and the e-ab ... in
D^c. 5, No. 1,1. 36. See also note to I.4 of Dec. 31, No. i ; and toC. T. 12061,1.9.
3 ff. : The sense is : Ur-Nini commanded forty servants of his wife that
they should build for NinS, who called him (Ur-Nin^) to be her prince, two
bamoth. Because Ur-Nini enumerates the buildings he himself had built,
we have to translate mu-ru not by ' they built,' but ' he caused them to build.'
6. mai, Br. 1739, diaridu, H. W. B. 149 : ' prince ^ \bi = pron. suffix ; fad,
Er. 9420, zakdru. PAD is here only shorter expression for "Sag pad-da, i. e.
■ called by the heart,' sc. to be her prince (mas-bi) ; hence also the king's name :
Ur-Njna = servant of NinS. Thurean-Dangin, O. L. Z. i. p. 167, 4, takes
MAS-PAD in the same sense as PAD (comp. Gudea B, iii. 14 : "iig ma'i-e-ni-
pad: des briquesje choisis), and translates our passage : '40 hiirodules ipoux de
la diesse Ninafdus' Comp. also O. B. X, 125, obv. 11.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 63
mtn edin
2 bamoth
mu-ru
he caused to build.
Col.
IV.
nin-ni
(The statue of) his mistress
mu-ru
he has built.
E-pa
The Epa
mu-ru
he has built.
had Sir-pur-la
The wall of Shirpurla
mu-ru
he has built.
Col. V.
gal + {gd)lu dingir uru (The image of) the king, the god
of the city,
mu-tu he has renewed.
Mh-al From Ma'al
kur-ta the mountain
5 gu-ghl-gii all kinds of wood
mu — he has (brought ?).
7. min edin. The sign for 'edin' is undoubtedly here the same as in Galet A
of Eannatnm ; comp. R. A. iv. No. I, pi. I, col. iv. 4, where edin is deter-
mined by CU. That this gu = land {mdtu) is clear from the parallelism :
(dingir^ Nin-gir-su-ra a-5ag kiag-ga-ni Gu-edin-na 'iu-na mu-ni-gl, 1. c. ; see
also the note to it. And because the edin has not the gu (=land) before it,
it is very probable that we have here the niD3 of Nina, as we have in the
Galet A those of Ningirsu. Hommel, P. S. B. A. 1895, p. 206, reads A-idinna
and translates: 'the town A-idinna he has built,' and because A-idinna is
translated by the Assyrians with nddu, ' leather-bag,' he concludes that A-idinna
= Nddu — Heb. 113. See Gen. iv. 16 : ' Cain dwelt in the land of Nod, on the
east of (or better, before) Eden {Idinna).'
IV. I. sc. salam.
3. For E-pa, see D&. 2ter, 4, note to 1. 23.
V. I. Lugal dingir uru is probably idingir) Ningirsu, the god (dingir)
of Girsu (the royal capital). It is interesting to see that Ur-Nina, king of
Shirpurla-Girsu, calls his god here lugal (king).
3 ff. See D^c. 2ter, 4, note to 11. 16, 18.
6. The last sign is not clear, probably = D Uor LAL = he has brought (taken) ;
comp. D^c. at's. No. i.
64
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
(Brick of Ur-NinS.)
Ddc. pi. 31, No. I, and R. A, iv. p. 91.
{Dingir) ]S[ind-Ur
lugal Sir-pur-la
dumu Gu-ni-du
Ab-Gir-su
Ur-Nbid,
king of Shirpurla,
son of Gunidu,
the Ab-Girsu
he has built.
4. What this Ab-Girsu was is difficult to tell. It may be a similar con-
struction to that mentioned in Die. pi. 2ter| No. 2, col. iii. 1. 1 (see the note), and
also similar to the zu-ab-tur-da and the zu-ab-gal, which latter two Jensen,
in K. B. iii'. p. 12, translates with 'das kleine Weltmeer' and 'das grosse
Weltmeer! Oppert may be right when he remarks, in R. A. ii. p. 85 : ' On
y a vu des bassins d ablution, ayant un usage analogue d la fameuse mer du
temple de Jerusalem. Ilfaudrait se demander si I'ap-Girsu ou mieux Vap de
Girsu ne pourrait pas rentrer de prh ou de loin dans la m^me catigorie!
R. A. iv. p.
(dingir) JSfin-su-gir
{dingir) ]Slind-Ur
gal-{ga)lu
Sir-pur-la
dumu Gu-ni-du
ud ab-Su-gir
mu-ru
a-mu-hib
e.(di»etr) JYind
mu-ru
Ib-gal
mu-ru
Dul-nir
(' Seuil-Borne.')
97, fig. 5, and p. 122, I.
To Ningirsu
Ur-NinS,
the king
of Shirpurla,
the son of Gunidu
— when the Ab-Girsu
he had built —
he presented it (i.e. the seuil-
borne).
The house of Nini
he has built.
The Ibgal
he has built.
The Dulnir
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 65
mu-ru he has built.
1 5 Igi-e-ni The Eigini (lit. house of his eye)
mu-ru he has built.
e-dam The house of his wife
mu-ru he has built.
e Ga-tum-dug The house of Gatumdug
20 mu-ru he has built.
Ti-al-ra The Tirash
mu-ru he has built.
15. For this building, comp. Jensen, K. B. iii'. p. 12, notes 2 and ** :
' Hochbau, Staged Better perhaps = massariu, H. W. B. p. 478, or bit
tamarti, Del. A. L^ p. 122, No. 3, 1. 15 = 'watch-tower,' ^ "IDN.
(Coupe d'Our-Nina.)
R. A. iv. p. 106, fig. n.
^Dingir) Ba-u To Ba'u
(dingir) JSTind-Ur Ur-Nint,
lugal king
Sir-pur-la of Shirpurla,
dumu Gu-ni-du son of Gunidu,
a-mu-iub has presented it.
The son of Ur-NinS, who succeeded him upon the throne of
Shirpurla, was AkurgaP. As yet no inscriptions of this monarch
have been found. All that is known about him is gathered either
from the inscriptions of his son (Eannatum) or from those of his
father (Ur-Nin^). Owing to the importance of those inscriptions
in more than one respect, it will be well to give a transcription
■ The meaning of the name of this king is not quite clear. Jensen (K. B. iii '.
p. 16, note 3) explains it as 'son of the great mountain,' i. e. of Enlil-B61 (?).
He also admits that it is possible to take the ' a ' in the sense of ' man.'
According to this the meaning would be : ' the man of Enlil-B61.' Comp. also
a-zu = as&, Br. 1 137 7 = physician; lit. 'a knowing one' (as Arabic v-asJ'
and |»;^^), from 2«, 'to know.'
66
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
of them here. They are published in D^c. pi. 2ter, No. i, and
especially D6c. pi. 2^^, No. i and No. 2.
Ddc. 2^8^ No. 2 \
{dingir) Nind-Ur gal + {ga)lu Sir-ptir-la
dumu Ni + gu + du
E Nin-gir-su A-ni-ta
mu-ru A-kur-gal
Lugal-Ur dumu
Ni-^al-la Lu^ + bar + #.? +
gid? + dul
Ddc. 2ter, No. I \
?-tum
(if/K^zV) Nind-Ur
A-ni-ia
Lugal-lir
gal + (^<2)&
Ba-lip
dumu
^ir-pur-la
dumu Gu-ni-du
?-du-du-gal
Mu + kur + ta + rz'
E Nin-su-gir
A-kur-gal
dumu
mu-ru
E {dingir) Nind
dumu
Gar-sag-
mu-ru
Nam-tum
ku-al
zu-ab-tur-da
(£a)lu
mu-ru
dup-sar
uru-ni mu-ru
Ddc. pi. 2l'i3, No. I, is the most important, because it gives us
Ur-Nina and his whole family. I shall give the description ''■ of
Lfon Heuzey in R. A. iii. p. 14 ff. in extenso :
' let les figures forment deux processions superpos/es, mar chant
en sens inverse, au-devant d'un personnage beaucoup plus grand
que les aulres, ce qui /videmment marque son rang exceplionnel. Le
' A translation of these inscriptions is not necessary. See, however, the
notes to Dec. 2^'", No. i.
^ Comp. also Hilprecht, O. B. I. p. 253, note i.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 67
nom, gravi tout prh du profit, ne per met pas de douter qtie ce ne soit
V image d' Our-Nina, deuxfois r^pMie.
' En regard de la file sup&teure, le rot se tient debout, le torse nu.
Le chdle de kaunakh, rendu de la /agon sommai're . . . enloure ses
reins. C'est le costume de Faction et du travail. En effet, le
souverain de Sirpurla se montre h nous dans une attitude qui est
faiie pour nous surprendre : sur la tete, completement ras^e, il soutient
de la main droite une grande corbeille ; . . . le roi Our-Nind . . .
humble . . . dans sa dhotion tient h honneur de remplir le rCle de
porteur d'offrandes, de ne'ocore, ou mieux Voffice de manoeuvre
chargeant sur sa tite les mat'Maux pour la construction du
temple. . . . En arrHre, un petit personnage, tenant par le col une
aiguikre apode, a bee long soriant de la panse, reprisente Te'chanson
royal.'
The king in the upper row looks toward the right, while the
other figures, five in number, march towards him. ' Le premier I
Heuzey goes on (p. 15), 'est plus grand de proportions, et plus
richement vitu que ceux qui le suivent, sans doute pour marquer la
digniti de fits atnL . . . Les quatre petits personnages qui viennent
ensuite et dont la faille va crescendo sont completement rasis et
portent le chdle simple, rouU en jupon entour des reins' In the same
fashion are also clad the servants of the king.
Of the second row of figures, Heuzey says (p. 16):
'(Z«) second registre de figures (est) dispose en sens contraire du
premier. Le roi, assis maintenant, se repose apres la idche termin^e.
Toujour s plus grand que les autres personnages et portant le kaunakh
enroule' autour de la taille, il live un vase a boire en forme de cornet.
Derriire son trdne h dossier, . . . un nouvel ^chanson tient taiguiire.
En avant, comme premiere figure, plus haute que les suivantes, un
dignitaire ^tend la main et semble parler h son maitre'. In the upper
row all the figures have the sign for ' son ' behind their names, while
in the lower row only the last three are honoured with it.
The inscription of this remarkable monument — which I shall
give exactly in the same sequence in which it is found on that
tablet — runs as follows : —
F 2
68
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
Ddc. pi. 2bi9, No. I.
Mu + ta +
ri + knr
dumu
Sir-pnr-la
lugal
UR
(dingir) Nin&
A + ni +
kur )- ra
dumu
Lugal +
Sir
dumu
A-kur-gal
dumu
dumu
Lid-da
e
'ngir) Nin-su-gir
mu-ru
Mi-al
Sir-pur-la dumu Gu-ni-du dumu Gur-sar
gal+ {ga)lu
{dingir) JVind + UR
Sag-
an-tug
kur-ta gu-ghl-
gisMU
du-du
Ba-lip
Nun-pad
dumu
E(ge ?)ud-bu
dumu
Nin4-ku-tur-
k
dumu
e {dingir) Nin&
Zu-ab-tur-da mu-ru
mu-j-u A-ni-ta
Mu-ta-ri-kur. In D^c. 2'-"', No. i, this son of Ur-NinS is mentioned
again. The signs there have the sequence : mu-kur-ta, and under them ri.
It is possible that this name has to be read Mu-ri-kur-ta.
A-ni-kur-ra. A has to be read, not da. The ni may belong after the ra,
and the whole name may be pronounced A-kur-ra-ni.
LugaWsiriezeti). So I would like to read the name of this son. He is
mentioned also in D^c. z^Sj No. 2.
A-kur-gal. ' Tient une aigui^re comme s'il remplissait auprh du prince
hiritier qui le fridde le rSle d'ichanson' (Heuzey, R. A. iii. p. i6).
Lid-da, the last sign, may also be SU. He is the 'firstborn,' while Akurgal
— to conclude from his height — may be the youngest son. It is hardly possible
to imagine that Lid-da would be = l^ta = riN? — a feminine, although the
sign ' dumu ' does not speak against this. If this were true, ' // resterait,' says
Heuzey, R. A. iv. p. 104, note i, ' <J expliquer comment, cTapris les usages
orientaux, une femme pourrait occuper ici la premiere place, avant les enfants
mdles, mime avant le prince h&itier.'
Gu-ni-du. In Die. 2'>i', No. 2 , written Ni + gu + du.
{dingir) JVind- Ur. So written here ; in the second row, however, the name is
written Ur-<,dingir) JVind. Eannatum, too, in his ' StMe des Vautours,' writes
the name Ur-NinS ; comp. Die. pi. 4, col. ii. 1 1.
A-ni-ta (Hilprecht, O. B. I. 253, note i, reads Da-ni-ta = 'at his side' =
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
69
The whole may be translated, beginning from the left (on the
right side of Ur-Nind) :
Ur-Nina
Second row, behind Ur-NinS (to
king
of Shirpurla, son of Gunidu, son
be read from the left to the right) :
of Gursar.
' UrAdingir) NinA,
Lidda
king Sagantuk.
he son,
of Shirpurla.'
the son
Aknrgal,
the son
In front of Ur-Nina (to be read
from the right to the left) :
Lugalshir,
' From Ma'al
the mountain all kinds of
the son
wood
Akurrani,
he brought.
the son
Balip,
Murikurta.
Nunpad
On the left side of the
king:
the son,
The ZU-AB-TUJi-DA
Anita.
E{ge?)-i(d-bu
he has bnilt.
the son,
The middle part :
Ninakutura
the son,
The house of
Ningirsu
the house of NinS
he has built.
he has built.
page) and .Sa^-flM-^w^ (Hilpr. 1. c. = 'he is chief) are servants or officials of the
king; so is Ba-lip. The latter is mentioned also in Dec. 2*1"", No. i, where
this name is followed by %-du-du-gal (the ? is the same sign which is found
in the name of the god mentioned in Galet A of Eannatum, col. vii. 18 ; which
see). Among other servants of the king may be mentioned a certain
Gar-sag-ku-al (Dec 2'™, No. i), Ni-gal-la, Lu^-bar-§e-gid{?)-dul, and
Nam-tum, the scribe (D^c. 2*"", No. 2).
%-ud-bu. The first sign is not clear. It looks as if it were e {bttu).
MA-al. The al is quite clear here, and no other sign than T. C. 91 . For
the whole expression, see "Die. 2*", No. 4, 11. 16-18. The signs du-du contain
the verb. They — or only one du — probably have to be supplied in Dec. 2*"',
No. 2, col. V. I. 6. '
Among the buildings mentioned here are the Zu-ab-tur-da (comp. also Dec.
2''''', No. i), the house of Ningirsu (ibid, and Dec. 2*", No. 2), and the house of
NinS (ibid.). In Dec. 2'°'', No. i, also a certain ' uru-ni' is mentioned,
which also occurs in Dec. 2, i, col. ii. 9. Jensen, K. B. iii'. p. 12, translates
it ' sein Observatorium.' See notes 4, 6, and * ibidem.
70 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
In this inscription eight sons of Ur-Nin^ are mentioned. If we
classify them according to their height, and take this as a basis for
determining their age, we would get the following result : —
Ur-Nind
(i) Lid-da, (2) Mu-ri-kur-ta, (3) A-ni-kur-ra, (4) Lugal-Ur, (5) A-kur-gal,
(6) Nun-fad, (j) E-ud-du, (8) Nind-ku-tur-a '-
It is remarkable that the firstborn, Lidda, is not mentioned in
any of the other inscriptions. Did he never succeed his father
upon the throne of Shirpurla ? Did Akurgal, his fifth son, in prefer-
ence to all the others, inherit the royal sceptre, and thus become
the immediate successor of Ur-Nina ? Interesting as these questions
are, we are yet, with the means on hand, unable to decide them ^.
This much only we know, that both Eannatum and Enannatum I.
call themselves ' son of Akurgal.' Another interesting fact is
that Eannatum, in his ' Stfele des Vautours,' calls his father lugal
(' king ' ') of Shirpurla, while in his other inscriptions he only terms
him 'patesi of Shirpurla*.' Not very much can be concluded
from this, because even Ur-NinS is styled by Eannatum ' patesi of
Shirpurla ' (comp. Galet A, col. viii. 4-7) ^. The translation of this
latter passage, however, is uncertain *. Ur-Nind's successor, however
— either Lidda or Akurgal — may have lost the title ' king ' in con-
sequence of an unsuccessful war. Eannatum, on the other hand,
' Hilprecht, O. B. I. p. 352, reads this name : Nind-iu-bauda.
'' We are inclined to believe tliat Akurgal was not the direct successor,
but probably followed upon the reign of Lidda. If this is true, then we
would have here a similar case to that of Eannatum and Enannatum I. —
both sons of Akurgal.
^ Comp. Dec. 4 A, col. ii. 8-10.
' Comp. Galet A, col. iii. 1-3 ; viii. 1-3.
^ Enteraena, on the other hand, calls Ur-Nina a king ; see R. A. ii. p. 148,
obverse, col. ii. 2, ' dumu-ka Ur-(iiiiigLr).Nind lugal ^irpurla-ki-ka-ge' i. c.
' the grandson of Ur-Nina, king of Shirpurla.'
° Probably we have to translate col. viii. : He (i. e. Eannatum) is the son
of Akurgal, &c., and begin a new sentence with 1. 6 : He (i. e. Eannatum)
is {katri) patesi of Shirpurla. If this explanation is right — which is highly
probable — then Ur-Nina alone would have been king of Shirpurla, his suc-
cessors being again reduced to mere patesis.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 71
being more successful, resumes again for a short time the title
'king' after his victory over Kish. This latter fact is very im-
portant. Eannatum. expressly tells us that Innanna gave him the
nam-lugal Kts-M, • the kingship of Kish' (Galet A, col. vi. 5), while
as ruler of Shirpurla he was only patesi (ibid. 1. 2). The state of
affairs then was as follows : —
Ur-Nin^, a usurper, was able to constitute himself h'ng of
Shirpurla in consequence of the weakness of the patesis of Shirpurla
who preceded him, they having been reduced by the kings of
Kish (comp. Mesilim) to complete powerlessness. Ur-Nini's suc-
cessors, however, were not able to retain the title of their father.
Was it internal disharmony between the sons of Ur-Nin^ which
caused this ? They lost the title ' king,' and had to accept that
of patesi. Undoubtedly they were forced to do this by one of the
successors of Mesilim, i. e. by a king of Kish. Eannatum — a great
hero — was able to overcome the old enemy Kish. He even was
so fortunate as to add to his old title, ' patesi of Shirpurla,' that
of ' king ' (sc. of ' Kish '), and by a stretch of this latter title he may
have called himself also ' king of Shirpurla '.' The successors of
Eannatum called themselves, and are called without any exception,
' patesis of Shirpurla.'
After these preliminary remarks about the titles of the different
members of the dynasty of Ur-Nina, we now turn our attention to
Eannatum " (i, e. ' The house of heaven is stable,' see Galet A, note
' This, however, is very doubtful. We find only two places in all the inscrip-
tions of Eannatum which might prove that he was ' king of Shirpurla ' : Dec.
pi. 4 A, col. i. 11. 5, 6, gal + {ga)lu Sir-la-pur-ki-ge, and Dec. s"', e', col. i,
E\annatum\ gal -^^ {gd)lti, &ir-la-pur-ki. Then follow the same titles as given
in Galet A, i. 5 ff., with few variations.
'' His inscriptions : —
Dec. pi. a'"', fig. 5 : see R. A. iv. p. 39, note 2 (Thurean-Dangin), and
R. A. iv. p. 122, 2.
Stele des Vautours : comp. Heuzey, R. A. iii. i ff., and especially Thureau-
Dangin, Comptes Rendus, 1897, p. 241 ff., and Heuzey, ibid. 1892, p. 236 ff.,
and 1895, p. 340 ff.
Dec. pi. 3 A : Jensen, K. B. iii'. p. 16, No. ii.; Thureau-Dangin, R. A. iv.
p. 38, note 3, and ibid. iv. pp. 124^ 125.
t
72 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
to i. 2), the son of Akurgal himself. Whether he reigned con-
temporaneously with his brother Enannatum I, or not, we cannot
tell. The fact that the sons of Enannatum I. succeeded upon the
throne of Shirpuria, and not those of Eannatum, makes it reasonable
to suppose that Eannatum preceded Enannatum I, This latter
ruler seems to have played only a minor rdle in early Babyloniarj
history. Only two of his inscriptions have so far come down to us.
One of them has been translated above on p. 14; comp. also
R. A. iv. p. 122, No. 3. The other was published recently by
Thureau-Dangin in Comptes Rendus, 1899, p. 348, pi. ii., and
reads :
Col. I.
En-an-na-tum Enannatum,
Dec. pi. 3 B.
„ c,
„ 3''', d' : Thureau-Dangin, R. A. iv. p. 39, note i ; and ibid. iv. p. 124.
„ E'.
pi. 4 A.
„ B.
„ C.
pi. 4'''", D^ ; Thureau-Dangin, R. A, iv. p. 39, note 3 (col. iii. 7-15);
also published in R. A. iii. No. i. pi. ii. {estmnpage) ,
pi. 4"'', F ' •- Thureau-Dangin, R. A. iv. p. 40, note 2 and note i.
„ r': Thureau-Dangin, R. A. iv. pp. 124, 125.
C. T. 23580, part vii. pp. i and 2.
' Briques ' : —
Dec. 31, No. 2 a and b. Also published in R. A. ii. p. 81, and translated ibid,
by Oppert, p. 86.
Other inscriptions : — •
Berlin Museum, No. V. A. 2599 = Jensen, K. B. iii. p. 15, i.
V. A. 2100 (unpublished).
Inscription -of London, P. S. B. A., Nov., 1890, p. 63.
Les Galeis: see Thureau-Dangin, R. S. 1897, p. 66, note I.
A : published in R. A. iii. No. iv. pi. v. ; revised edition in R. A. iv. No. i.
pi. i., translated by Thureau-Dangin in R. S. 1897, p. 66 ff.
B t not yet published, is in the museum of Constantinople.
C : published in D^c. 2'*', No. 6.
D; published in D^c. 2, No. 3.
E : unpublished, in Constantinople.
EABLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 73
pa-te-si patesi
Sir-la-pur-^i of Shirpurla,
dumu A-kur-gal son of Akurgal,
5 pa-te-si patesi
Sir-la-pur-'^'-ka-ra (?) of Shirpurla —
ud ^^>»S'r) Nin-gir-su-ge when by Ningirsu's
Col. II.
^"g-gi ha-pad-da-a true heart he had been called,
erin la^-lag (then) bright cedars
kur-ta viu-na-ta-DVL-DU from the mountain (—hardly the
Lebanon, m6re probably = the
Elamitic mountains !),
e-ku mu-na-sig-sig-ga-a (and when) in (?) the temple he
had been filled with power,
5 sag-M-bi (then) the (lit. its) coverings
(ornaments)
erin lag-la^ of the bright cedars,
Col. III.
mu-na-ni-gub he put them on.
Ur-da-lu-uh Ur-Galub
ni-gab-ku mu-na-KU-KU-na as guardian he installed,
I. 6. RA doubtful. We would expect GE.
II. 3. For DUL-DU, see Br. 9593.
4. This line is parallel to 1. i, and dependent on i. 7.
SIG-SIG-GA = to fill {malA) with strength {SIG = kcfmu, comp. Heb,
X^'^\, Or, when in a house he had filled them up, i. e. stored them (the cedars)
^way.
5. Y ox sag-si see H. W. B. p. 316 sub kuViu; Kopfbinde, Koffbedeckung
und dergl. Here probably = coverings, ornament. Thureau-Dangin translates
11. 4 ff. : et {lorsque) dans U temple il I'eut transport (J) dans . .. ce bois de ddre
brillant il pUtfa^
6. Might also be translated : ' And when in the temple he had stalled them
up (lit. into the temple . . . had filled them np).'
III. 3. Ni-gab, Br. 5352 and H. W. B. 584 (amUu) kepu.
KU-KU-na has probably to be read durun-durun-na, see Br. 10532 ^
uiBib,
74 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
gal+ (ga)lu ki-an-na-ag-ni to his king, who loves him,
g (dingir) Nin-gir-su-ra viz. to Ningirsu,
mu-mu-na-gar he presented them.
6. GAR. See Br. 11982 and H. W. B. 691 : iar&ku.
Eannatum, his brother, on the contrary, is the greatest of the
whole dynasty. The deeds of this monarch have been preserved
to us on different monuments, among which the ' Stele des
Vautours ' is the most important. In order to obtain a full con-
ception of his time we must compare this ' St^le ' with the so-called
' Cone ' of Entemena. Those monuments, in connection with the
Galet A, give us the following interesting piece of history : —
The god of Shirpurla (Ningirsu) and the god of Gishban, at the
instigation of Enlil (god of Nippur), agree to settle the boundaries
between their respective territories (Cone, i. 1-7). Mesilim, king
of Kish — a contemporary of Lugalshuggur, patesi of Shirpurla ; see
above, p. 16 — in the quality of lord paramount of Shirpurla
corroborates the result of ' this settling of boundaries/ and erects
a statue on the junction of the two territories, to mark out the
boundaries of the territory of Shirpurla on the one side and of
Gishban' on the other (Cone, i. 8-12). Ush, however, a certain
ambitious patesi of Gishban, is not satisfied with this decision.
He takes away the statue which Mesilim had erected, and then
invades Shirpurla undoubtedly to extend his territory beyond the
boundary previously fixed (13-21). A war between Shirpurla and
Gishban ensues.
Mesilim, who feels dishonoured by this action of Ush, takes
the side of Shirpurla and defeats Gishban (22-31). Gishban in
' It shonid be borne in mind that the better reading of the name of this city-
is CIS-UJf^UH hemg the second half of the sign reproduced in Br. 8124.
Comp. Winckler, A. F. p. 373, note 3, and the note to the reading of the city
Hu-uli-nu-ri-ki further below, and see for the present C. T. 94-10-16, 2 : ?««
ui-sa Hu-hu-nu-riM, and C. T. 94-10-16, 4: mu-ui-sa Hu-UH-nii-ri-l'i ,
which shows that the sign in question has to be pronounced either HU or
UIJ. GIS-UH\s, the modem Djokha, which latter might be a variant of the
former.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 75
course of time again becomes restless. It invades, under its patesi
Gunammide, the territory of Shirpurla, and more specifically the
Guedin, a district sacred to Ningirsu. ' Gunammide, the patesi of
Gishban, according to the command of his god ... the Guedin,
the beloved territory of Ningirsu, he destroyed ' (Ddc. 4^'^, d^, col. iii.
7-15 ; see note to Galet A, iv. 4). Eannatum, after having fortified
Shirpurla sufficiently ('the wall of Uruazagga he built,' Galet A,
iii. 7), and having led his armies victoriously against Elam. and Gishgal
(Galet A, iii. 13-19), feels himself strong enough to deal a deadly (?)
blow at Gishban. ' Gishban he put under the yoke, twenty of its
dead ones he buried ' (ibid. iii. 24 flf.). Having done this, he restores
the sacred territory, the Guedin, to Ningirsu (Galet A, iv. 2 ff.) ;
concludes a treaty with Enakalli, (one of) the successor(s) of
Gunammide ; digs a canal ' from the great river (i. e. Euphrates ?)
to the Guedin ' (C6ne, ii. i ff.), thus establishing a boundary between
the two territories. By the side of this canal he erects a statue of
himself, restores the statue of Mesilim to its old place (C6ne, ii.
4 fF.), and makes the Gishbanites swear never to invade the sacred
territory of Ningirsu again, nor to trespass this boundary.
' In the future time the territory of Ningirsu, when (the Gishbanites)
should invade it again, the dyke and the canal, if they should
trespass it, the statue, if they should take it away — at that time
when they invade it, then the sa-^us-gal (i. e. Eannatum) of Utu,
the powerful king, by whom they have sworn \ shall arise against
Gishban' (D^c. pi. 3^8, d', col. i.).
The ' StHe des Vautoiirs ' has for its main object the commemora-
tion of this treaty with Enakalli, patesi of Gishban, after the latter
city had been defeated by Eannatum '.
The places of the ' St^Ie des Vautours ' which mention Ms
treaty have been arranged by Thureau-Dangin (R. A. iv. p. 124)
as follows : —
' Comp. also Galet A, i. 2, note.
^ And not to commemorate the defeat of Gishban (Hilprecht, O. B. I.
p. 271), which preceded the erecting of the ' Stele des Vautours.'
76 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
Ddc. 3 A, col. i.
E-an-na-ium me i. e. Eannatum I am,
sa lus-gal the scourge
(dingir) utu of Shamash,
gal-{- {ga)lu zal si(g)-ga-ka the king filled with splendour ;
5 {gd)lu ^'^-BAN-^'-ra unto the Gishbanites
e-na-sum I have given an oath
nam e-na-ta-kud and sworn.
{ga)lu si^-BAN-'^'-ge The Gishbanites
E-an-na-tum-ra to Eannatum
1. ME, Br. 10358 : anaku ; comp. Dec. 7, ii. 4; UrMmgir) Ba-n me.
2. SA SUS-GAL. Jensen, K. B. iii'. p. 16, and Thureau-Dangin, R. A.
iv. p. 38, note 3, read sa-u-gal, which the latter translates ' serment.' In
R. A. iv. p. 124, the latter, however, reads sa-'Sui (Br. 8643)-^a/, and com-
pares iv. R. 27, 58 a (sa 'iu-ul-gal), and ii. R. 19, 3 b (sa 'su-ui-kat). Comp.
also Br. 7166 and 7167. For iuikallu, see H. W. B. p. 694. It is a title
which even later Assyrian kings apply to themselves, viz. Tiglath-pileser
(col. iii. 33) and Sargon (Lay. 33, 10). According to Thureau-Dangin, 1. c, this
expression signifies ' r^pervier,' ' le filet ^ while Delitzsch, 1. c, translates it by
• Eallstrick, Eangneiz.' Comp. K. 133, obv., 7, 8: Ninib karradu sa M-us-
kal-laAu i^—gii SA StT-US-KAL-bi) a-a-bu i-sa^-^a-pu. This latter writing
shows that SA S&-US-^AL = Str-U^-^AL.
The best way to translate this expression would be by ' rod,' ' reed ' — on
account of ^ — i. c. eine (Zuchf)-Rute, a ' scourge.' This is evident from 1. 29,
where the sa-'iu'i-gal is said to an-ta ge-iui, ' to cast down,' ' to overpower '
his enemies. This expression occurs also in C6ne of Entemena, i. 29, vi. 22.
4. ZAL, Br. 5319: namdru; ZAL-ZAL, Br. 5359, kamA ia nabli;
SIG{-GA), Br. 3393, maM ; the whole might be translated 'king, filled with
light ' (splendour). Comp. also Gudea B, viii. 62, 63.
For lines 1-4, comp. also Jensen, K. B. iii '. p. 16, No. ii.
6. .SOT/, H. W. B. p. 450 ; nadAnu: ' einenEidleisten,angeben,kundthun,
leigen^ ; comp. also ii. R. 65, obv., i. 4 : mamitu iddinA.
7. KUD, Br. 390; tarn-H, H. W. B. 708. NAM . . . KUD, according to
Thureau-Dangin, 1. 1. : ' paratt avoir ici un sens analogue h NAM ERIM . . .
KUD-iDA) ' ; see Br. 2182 (written : nam-ne-ru . . . kad-dd) = mamitu
tamii ; comp. H. W. B. p. 415 sub mammitu.
9. The RA here, as well as in 1. 5, is postfix, dependent upon sum and
kud — and not an essential part of the name of Eannatum, as Jensen, K. B. iii '.
p. 14, note 13 (E-dingir-ra-na-gin, see Galet A, i. 2), supposes.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 77
10 nam mu-na-kud-du have sworn —
zi {dingir) uiu by the life of Shamash
\rnu-ni-pad-de (comp. they have sworn.
Ddc. 3 A, iii. 4)]
Ddc. 3 ,A, col. iv. I , and 4*6', f^, col. iv. 2 ff.
{g)uru ni-ku A (boundary)-canal I have made,
e til-zi{d) na-e and to keep (them) back I filled
it with water,
15 da-ur da-gal-la-ku in order that for ever
12. PAD, Br. 9417 : tamA.
13. The first sign occurs again in Gudea D, iii. 3 : mh-{g)uru ki-ag-ga-ni ,
a.'oA passim. Comp. Jensen, K. B. iii'. p. 52, note i and * : ' meine geliebte
Barke ' ; T. C. 201 ; and Hommel, P. S. B. A. i8g6, p. 20.
NI-Ki/. This Kt/ occurs again on the C6ne of Entemena, ii. 23 : ^ar-ku
ni-kit, where it is parallel to kad-du ba-us. But VS, according to H. W. B.
p. 80, is = emMu ; (£)uru ni-kic then may be = usurta (sic) ^mid, i.e. ' eine
Umschrankung (H. W. B.' 122) errichtite, legte er a>t':=a. boundary-canal
he made, thus identifjring T. C. 201 with T. C. 194. In later times these
two signs were separated. If this be true, then a mh-{£)uru is only a small
boat, such as is used only on a canal, in contradistinction to a m&. Kar
14. NA-E. E, Br. 5844 : tfiii, ' water,' as verb ' to water, to fill with water ';
comp. O. B. O. 87, ii. 36, 37 : a-ne gul-la mu-da-e, ' with waters of joy he
watered,' i. c. filled. The same meaning has to be postulated here.
(E)-TIL-ZID. According to Br. 1577 = TIL-ZID-DA = nttu, H. W. B. 460.
According to this lines 13 and 14 might be translated : '■eine Umschrankung
legte er an undfitllte sie mit Wasser (na-e) als ZurUckhaltung {ntta or nliU),'
i. e. he filled the boundary canal with water in order to keep away the Gish-
banites. This would actually agree with C6ne of Entemena, i. 32-ii. 3 :
Eannatum, patesi of Shirpurla, e-bi id-nun-ta gu-edin-na-ku ib-ta-ni-ud-du,
' a canal from the great river to the Guedin he made to go.' This canal {e-bi),
called here {g)aru ( Umschrankung), was then filled with the water from the
great river (jjlisn nniH), the Euphrates. Thureau-Dangin, 1. c, translates
lines 13 and 14 : Unfossi . . . .fai creusi.
15. (&-«>-■= Semi tism for ddrH. or dAru, H. W. B. p. 213. Comp. O. B. I.
261, note 4.
DA-GAL-LA-ku. That da-GAL = da-mal, see Hommel, Sum. Lesestuclce,
p. 137 b.
78 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
ki-sur-ra [comp. D^c. 3^", the territory
d\ col. i. 1 ff.]
{dingir) Nin-gir-su-ka-ge of Ningirsu
ha-ra-mu-bal-e they may not iiivade ;
D^c. 3^", d\ col. i. 4 ff.
\e\-kur + e-bi and the canal
20 su-bal ba-ra-ag-ge they may not cross over,
na-ru-a-bi and that stMe
ba-ra-pad-du they may not take away.
ud-da mu-bal-e On the day when they
should cross over,
sa suh-gal then the scourge
DA-MAL-LA, Br. 6679-6681, which latter again is dial, equivalent of
DAGAL, Br. 5446; rapdiu, rap'iu, H. W. B. 626.
DA-UR DA-GAL-LA-ku==-ana dUri raph, i.e. for ever = ana dAru umi,
V. R. 65, 23 b.
16. Lines 16-18 are identical withD^c. l^'^, d', i. 1-3, and supplement each
other.
For ki-sur, see C6ne of Entemena, i. 7 ; ^. i°; 12.
18. BAL. See C6ne of Entemena, vi. 16 : an-ia bale-da. BA-RA, Br. 1 23 :
Id = negation.
19. Thureau-Dangin reads this line [/ykiir-e-bi, and says, 1. c, note ii : ' le
signe khr est embotti dans le signe e.' This very same sign we find also in
Tablette A of Entemena (R. A. ii. p. 148), face, iv. 8: zu-ab E (^ = kiir-e)
GW-RA.
E (Br. 5841) as well as {E)-KtJR (written BAByE, see H. W. B. p. fii,
and iv. R. 14, No. 3, 11, 12 a, ^, signify = 2/5« ani palga, ' Bewdsserungsgraben
und KanaV R. A. ii. p. 148, col. iv. 8, therefore, has to be read and trans-
lated : au-ab kitr-e SIR-ra, i. c. unto Enki he built an ab-zu for (?■«) the
long {ff.d=ar&kA) canal [khr-e).
20. The first sign is not clear ; it may be either KI or SU. Both as prefixes
form nouns, Hommel, S. L. p. 141, 2 b.
Kl-bal or Sd-bal =the going over, the crossing; see above, 1. 18.
Ba-ra = Id ; ag-ge = epliu. Word for word ; a crossing not to make.
21. na-ru-a-bi. This stBe was erected by Mesilim on the boundaries of
Kish and Shirpnrla (C&ne of Entemena, i. 12) ; Ush, the patesi of Gishban,
removes it (ibid. i. 19), and Eannatum restores it again to its former place
(ibid. ii. 6-9).
22. PAD. See Cone of Entemena, i. 19.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 79
25 {<ii"g'r) Utu ofShamash,
lugal zal si{g)-ga-ka a king filled with splendour,
nam e-ta-kud-du by whom they have sworn,
S'^-BAN-^'-a over the Gishbanites
an-ia ^e-lul may it come.
30 E-an-na-ium me Eannatum I ^,
gal-na-ga-mu-zu may I be very wise :
tu-^u NAMSABU-2, two doves,
igi-ba KAS-SIG ba-ni-gar upon them I poured wine
ur-sag-ba ni-mi-gab and sacrificed them.
29. AN-TA = elii (Br. 459); ^US, Br. 8700: katdmu. The subj. is sa-
'iuhgal, 1. 24. This line shows that the meaning of sa-^ui-gal can be only
that which was given above, viz. ' scourge'; a hiikal la m&girS is 'a scourge
for the not subservient ones' (Tiglath-pileser, Sargon); an-tage-sui can only
be translated by ' may {^e) the scourge {sa-'iui-gal) of Shamash come (Jf«J =
katdmu, H. W. B. p. 362) over {an-ta) the Gisbanites.' Comp. also sa-iui-gal
ne4us (Cone of Entemena, i. 29) and sa-iui-gal-ni ict-ni-'sui (ibid. col. vi.
22, 23).
31. GAL . . . ZU, according to Thureau-Dangin, 1. c. note \1 = GAL-AN-
ZU (Br. 6853; H. W. B. p. 139) : iriu; comp. also Cyl. B, ii. 8 ; xiii. 13,
NA-GA-MU\s the prefix to ZU. ZU, Br. 130 : mudii.
32. tu-^u, Br. 1084; summatu, H. W. B. 503.
namsabu = issuru, Br. 2232. Thus we should probably read, and not
NAM.
33. The third sign is not clear. Thureau-Dangin thinks (I. c. note 19) that
it is composed of BI ■\- SIG {=IGI-GUNty, E. C. 391). For igi-gunO.
comp. Br. 7005 and 7373. The latter has also the meaning dannu, rabii, and
dummuku. Probably in these old times igi-gunA was = igi-Mnnu {^IG =
damku, Br. 9446). For KA& {BPj-SIG comp. R. A. iii. p. \i(s = 'iikaru
damikium. GAR = 'iakdnii (Br. 11978). The whole line may be translated
literally : Upon them {igi-ba, i. e. upon their faces) I placed {ba-ni-gar) wine
{KAS-SIG), i. c. I poured upon them wine, apparently a ritual observance.
34. The first sign is that for i/R with inserted ^»»-signs. Because
GAB = fitH, patdru (Br. 4488) : spalten, zerreissen, durchbrechen, we would
not be far from the correct interpretation if we explain this line by : their
iir-sag I pierced through, destroyed. But l/R-SAG means karadu, karra-
dAtu, which when put into the ^K»-state may very well stand for
' life ' or ' heart.' In 1. 33 he pours upon the doves wine ; in this line he
states that he destroyed their vital { = gunu-ii^i) strength, i.e. he killed,
sacrificed them. Lines 29 ff. seem to indicate that his wish {ge) will surely
8o EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
35 ^liin^ir) Uf^ For Shamash,
gal-\- (galu) \zai\ si{g)-[ga-ra] the king filled with splendour,
Un-UNUG-^' inLarsa,
E-BAR-BAR in (the temple) E-BAR-BAR,
ninda-gud ku-an-kii young oxen I offered.
Ddc. 4ter_ f'*, col. iii. 4.
40 E-an-na-tum me Eannatum I am,
ka-a-kud-du obedient
lugal-mu to my king
{dtngir) EN-KI-ra (we would Ea.
expect here the god Utti)
ab-ba dug-ga-na (cp.D^c.3 A,col.ii. i) If any proud one
D^c. 3 A, col. ii. 2.
45 a-ba iar-ra-na (or) any powerful one
be fulfilled, i. e. that he will punish the Gishbanites if they shoald trespass
the boundary canal. It is, so to speak, an oath corroborated by this sacrifice
of two doves. Apparently the king had such sacrifices instituted all over
the country, in order to celebrate in the right manner his treaty with the
Gishbanites. This is evident from D^c. 4'^'', f'', col. v. 2 ; where we are
told that four other doves were sacrificed, two of them in the city of Ur
for Nannar : E-an-na-tum me gal-na-ga-mu-zu tu-^u 4 igi-ba KAS-SIG ba-ni-
gar tir-sag-ba ni-mi-gab 2 NAMSABU Uru-unug-^i-ku.
i^. NINDA, T. C. 53; Ur-Ba'u, iii. i. NINDA-GUD probably =
GUD-NINDA = biru in the sense of bUru, 'young ox,' H. W. B. p. 169.
KU-AN-KIJ. ku = verbal-prefix. For other examples, see Lugalzaggisi,
iii. 33 ; mu-tar-ri-KU-a (read : mu-ku-tar-ri-a) ; C6ne of Entemena, iii. 21 :
e-ku-kid; Dec. pi. 31, No. 3, col. iv. 5 : ge-na-ku-tum.
KiJ = ak&lu (Br. 882), here = Shafhel, 'to give to eat' = to sacrifice to
somebody. K(J is used here for ' to sacrifice,' because the ninda-gud were
' given to eat ' to the priests of Shamash.
41. KA . . . KUD, Br. 561 ; dalMu, H. W. B. p. 219, and K. 257, rev.,
17, 18 : edlum mtiddallum (written : KA-TAR-RA) = obedient (to the
gods).
44. AB-BA DUG-GA-na may be best explained by 'hero (comp. Br. 3820,
am» AB = nastku, H. W. B. 472) of his (««) mouth' {DUG-GA = pO) or
' hero of his words ' {kibttu) = ' a proud person,' ' ein Maulheld!
45. a-ba, Br. 11370; mannu, H. W. B. 419: ' wer immer.' Is this a-ba
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 8l
{ga)Iu [^'^-BAN-^'-a] of the Gishbanites
em'm da-gur-ra-da-an should break his promise,
ud-a-ru or in future time
ka-an-ghl should want to take it back,
50 ud-da enim-ba "iu-ni-bal-e on that day when he breaks
his promise
sa ius-gal the scourge
{dingir) Ufu of Shamash,
lugal zdl si{g)-ga-ka the king filled with splendour,
nam e-ta-kud-du by whom they have sworn,
55 ir^-BAN-^^-a over the Gishbanites
an-ta ^e-lus may it come *-
identical with the ab-ba in 1. 44 ? The third sign, according to Thureau-
Dangin, 1. c. p. 125, 2, is that for ^AR = 3600. As such it is that of
Br. 8981 : birku, ' Icnee.' He translates iar-ra-na by 'par sa puissance ? ' thus
considering the T]"13 as the 'seat of power.' For the reading of this sign
(= Jar instead of DUG), see also Meissner, A. B. P. R. pp. 98, 99.
47. enim da-gur-ra-da-an may mean : whosoever (a-^a, 1. 45) shall turn {da-
gur-ra — tdru, S* 209) against {da, Br. 6655 : ana =Hebr. pS) his {an ? for
na ?) word {enim = amdtu) promise. As such it would be like 1. 50, which see.
48. ud-a-ru, probably = ud-ul-ru-{d) = iimt sdti, Br. 7939.
49. ka-ghl, Br. (tw, pukurrA, H. W. B. 537: ' Reklamation, Anspruchs-
erkebung.' Here = verb, on account of an = pakdru = ipakkar, ' he claims.'
50. Lit. ; On the day when {ud-da) he transgresses {Ju-ni-bal-e ; bal —
nabalkutu) his promises, or destroys, breaks ( = nakdru) his promise.
It bears the significant subscription : ' Stfele : Its name — nobody
has ever seen its name — is : Nin-girsu en menluma namti(id) Kfs-
' This formula is repeated several times, only the gods, by whom Eannatum
and the Gishbanites sware, change. Among the gods we find, besides Utu,
also Enlil (see C. T. 23580, col. ii. 6 ff. : {gd)lu gis-BAN-H-ge \ E-an-na-
tum-ra \ nam mu-na-kud-du \ zi (dingir) En-Kl \ lugal an ki (sic ; not DI, as
King copied)-/Ja ; comp. also D^c. 4'"'', f', col. vi.) ; Ninharsag, whom Ean-
natum calls his mother (C. T. ibid. col. iv. i and D^c. 4 B, col. iii. ; Die. 4'»'',
f', col. ii.) ; Enki (see above, and Die. 4 B, col. iv.) ; Ninki (Die. 3 A, col. iii. ;
Dec. 3"=, e', col. i.) ; and Enzu (Die. 4 B, col. vi.).
G
82 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
edina ' ; stele of Guedin, the beloved territory of Ningirsu, which
Eannatum has consecrated to Ningirsu ^.'
But Eannatum was not satisfied with this ; he imposes a heavy
tribute upon Gishban, consisting of one karu of grain for Ninl
and one karu for Ningirsu, besides 144,000 (?) great karu
(C6ne, ii. 1 9 ff.).
After having reduced Gishban to tranquillity, Eannatum also
carries his victorious weapons against Erech (Warka) and Ur (the
Ur of the Chaldees), Ki-Utu (Larsa?) and Az (on the Persian
Gulf) — the patesi of which latter city he kills — against Melimme
and Arua ^. These latter cities were all in the neighbourhood of
Shirpurla. Last of all, he crushes and defeats Zuzu, king of Uh
(Galet A, iv. 6-v. 8). But even this does not exhaust the record of
his victories. He becomes king of Kish — Kish, which for so long
had itself been sovereign over Shirpurla. How this victory was
accomplished is not evident from the inscriptions so far extant*.
Probably at some future time we may find an account of this war.
' The name, according to Thureau-Dangin, means : ' Ningirsu, seigneur de
la tiare magnifique, fais vivre le canal Kish-Mina,' 1. i;. p. 40, note i.
^ Dec. pi. 4'°'', f' : na-ru-a | mu-bi | {ga^lu-a nu mu-bi igi-e \ (dingir) Nin-
gir-su I en-men-lum-ma \ nam-ti \ ifd) Kii-edin-na \ na-ru-a \ gu-edin-na \ a-
sag H-ag I i^dingir) Nin-gir-su-ka \ E-an-na-tum me \ ^dingir) Nin-gir-su-ra \
iu-na mu-ni-gl-a. \
^ Here probably belongs also Dec. s""', e', col. ill., where upon A-ru-a-ki
mu-ga-la follows S U- UD-D U Ki en-gi. The verb is not given — we expect
however some such expression as tu-ku bi-sig or mu-^a-lam or sag-ba-mu-du.
We then would have to translate the SU-UD-DU {SU = kdtu = portion or
side, H. W. B. 599 ; UD-DU = Br. 7876, elA or sUu, hence either = the upper
(northern) or eastern {stf) portion) of Kengi (sc. he subdued).
' The king of Kish whom Eannatum overcomes was in all probability a
certain Al-\_zu-zu-d\ gal+ {ga)lu A'fsl-lii], mentioned in D^c. 4'"', f', col. iii,
and especially in P. S. B. A. Nov. 1890, p. 63, where we read in part, col. iii.
3 ff. r gal+ {ga)lu Kfs-ki bi \ na-dib-bi, i. e. the king of Kish he captured, and
further below, col. iv. 2 ff. -. gii-tug {-pi)-ni \ Al-zu-zu-a'\ mu-sar-ra-bi \ ab-ta-
gir-a I gti-tug{-pi)-ni\ Al-zu-zu-a I bil mu-ba-sum, i.e. 'of his vassal {der
Hbrige) Alzuzua, his inscription he burnt, his vassal Alzuzua (himself) he cast into
the fire ' ; and again, ibid., col. v. 2 ff. : gii-tug{-fi)-ni \ Al-zu-zu-a igi '^dingir)
NinA-ku I dingir-ra-ni \ na-dib-bi \ a-ne na-dib-bi, i. e. ' of his vassal Alzuzua
before Nina, his god(s) he captured and threw him (them) into the water.'
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 83
Eannatum was not only a hero in war, but also a wise adminis-
trator. He not only renewed three suburbs of his capital (Galet A,
iii. 5 if.), one of which — Uruazagga — he even surrounded by a wall,
but also improved the condition of Shirpurla itself by digging
different canals, which he consecrated to his god Ningirsu: the
Kishedin, which probably marked the boundary between the Giiedin
and Gishban, and which the Gishbanites had to swear never to
cross; the Lummagirnuntashagazaggipadda along the territory of
Ningirsu (D^c. 2ter, fig. 5) ; and the Lummadimshar (Galet A, vii. 4).
Urukagina, we have seen, was the first to build a canal, viz. one
for NinS, which he called Nind-^'-tum-a. In the C6ne of Entemena
are also mentioned the canal Lummasirta (iii. 20), the Imdubba
(ii. 11), and the Namnundakigarra (ii. 13, et passim). Here then we
have the beginning of the most characteristic feature of Babylonia.
Babylonia becomes ' the land of canals,' such as the Psalmist had
in mind when he wrote that touching psalm : ' By the rivers of
Babylon we sat down and wept.' Further, Eannatum was not un-
mindful of his duty to the gods. He confesses in the opening of
Galet A that all that he is and that he has comes from his gods.
Accordingly, he shows his gratitude by erecting sanctuaries for
Enlil, Ninharsag, Ningirsu, and Utu, and by restoring old buildings,
which had been erected by his predecessors in honour of the gods,
among which is to be found the Tirash.
The greatness of Eannatum as a mighty warrior, wise adminis-
trator, and faithful servant of his god may be best understood from
his own words :
GALET A OF EANNATUM.
Comp. Thureau-Dangin, R. S. 1897, p. 66, and R. A. iv.
No. I, pi. I.
Col. I.
{Dtngir) J^in-gir-su-ra For Ningirsu —
E-an-na-tum Eannatum
I. 2. E-an-na-tum, This is the correct reading of the name. The argu-
G 2
84
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
pa-te-si
Sir-la-^'-pur-ge
mu-pad-da
{dingir) En-lil-ge
a-sum-ma
(dingir) Nin-gir-su-ka-ge
sag-pad-da
{dingir) Nind-ge
ga-zi-ku-a
patesi
of Shirpurla,
he who was chosen (called)
by Enlil,
to whom power was given
by Ningirsu,
he who was chosen by the heart
Col. II.
^'^'"S''-) N\in\-har-[sag'\-ka-ge
mu-sag-sa-a
{dtngtr) Znnanna-ka-ge
gis-tugi^pi) sum-ma
(dtngtr) EN-KI-ka-ge
ki-ag
(dingir) Dumu-zi-zu-ab-ka-ge
of Nina,
he who was nourished with the
milk of life
by Ninharsag,
he who was called by the heart
of the goddess of Innanna,
to whom intelligence was given
by Enki,
the beloved
of Dumuzizuab,
ment of Jensen (K. B. iii'. p. 14, note 13) that, because such forms as
E-AN-na-ra-du (see Dec. 3 A, col. 3, 5) and E-An-ra-na-du (see Dec. 3 A,
col. i. 9 ; D&. 4 A, col. 1. 5) occur, the name has to be read E-dingira-na-D U
is based upon a misunderstanding of the text. In both cases EA is post-
position, depending upon kud : ' to Eannatum (RA) they have sworn.' That we
have to pronounce DUas turn is apparent from col. v. 10 : E-an-na-tum-ma.
TUM, Br. 4884, k&nu, klnu. The whole name then would be BlWiaml-uMn,
' the house of heaven is stable,' just as En-anna-tum is BU-'iaml-uktn, ' the
lord of heaven is stable.' For Du with the pronunciation tum=kdnu, khiu,
comp. Cone of Entemena, vi. 8, geiia + me + turn, probably to be xe3.A ge-na-tum-
me (comp. aXso ge-ga-lam-mt, ibid. 1. 20), and the name En-an-na-ium{a).
5. Comp. Lugalzag. i. 19.
7. i, Br. 6547, emilku; sum = nad&nu.
II. 2, 3. Lugalzag. i. 28, 29.
4. The arrangement of signs is mu + 'iag, and under the iag the first part
of sa, and under this latter the second part of sa + a. sa, Br. 2 290 ; nabii,
H. W. B. p. 441. Thureau-Dangin reads : mu-sa-a. But why! The traces
of fa^ are clear on both copies. For Ja^ we might also read i/«^ = called with
a good name.
5. ka-ge, double genitive! Compare also Amiaud, R. A. ii. p. la.
6. Lngalzag. i. 17.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
85
I o M (it)
{din^r) Pa-sag-ka-ge
ku-li ki-ag
gai+ {ga)lu + (^'ngir) Erim-ka-ge
the abarakku
of Pasag,
the beloved friend
of Lugal-Erim,
Col. III.
dumu A-kur-gal
pa-te-si
Sir-la-^''^-pur-\ge']
^diugir) Nin-gYr-su-ra
Gi'r-su-^'
\kt-i\i mu-na-gi
bad Uru-azag-ga
mu-na-ru
{dingir) JSfind
I Nind-J^'
mu-na-ru
E-an-na-tum-e
Elam-^ar-sag igi-e (sic)-^a
the son of Akurgal
patesi
of Shirpurla —
for Ningirsu
the city of Girsu
he has restored,
the wall of Uruazagga
he has built.
For Nind
the city of Nind
he has built —
Eannatum,
Elam, a mountain higher than a
temple,
10. SI-UM= iti= abarakku, H. W. B. p. 12 ; Br.9427. Here with phonet.
compl. /« = Seinitism.
12. ku-U, Br. 10579; ^I'ru, H. W. B. 10.
13. The third sign is found in T. C. No. 58, and has to be identified,
not with giigal, as Amiaud, Thureau-Dangin (E. C. 359), and Hommel
(P. S. B. A. 1893, p. i) do, but with Br. 949, Erim. So also Jensen.
Gisgal occurs in col. iii. 17; comp. also Ur-Ba'u, col. ii. 2, in de Sarzec, Dec.
pi. 7 and 8 : uru ki-ag (dingir) Lugal-Erim-ki-ka-ge. (dingir) Lugal-Erim is
the god who is king of the city Erim, just as Ningirsu was the lord {niri) of
Girsu. Erim was one of the parts of Shirpurla. A king of Erim is mentioned
also in D^c. 30"=, No. 21.
III. 6. ki-bi . . . gi, Br. 2405. v. R. 44, 39 c : =ana diriiu-itAr.
7. bad, T. C. 71 ; Br. 4386, dUru, Uru-azag-ga is here a proper name,
another part of Shirpurla ; it means ' the holy city.'
8. ru = banA, Br. 5348.
13. Elam, Br. 9009; liar-sag, Br. 8553, iadA.
igi-e-ga. So read, not igi-ge-ga, and comp. Gudea, Cyl. B, i. 4 in R. A. ii.
p. 126. The first copy has e instead of ge I (see R. A. iii. No. iv. pi. 5). The
whole phrase : igi (Br. 9265 ; ma^ar, H. B. W. 403) higher than a house (« or
86
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
tu-ku bi-sig
1 5 sa^ar-dul-tag-hi
mu-dub
su-nir Gisgal-^'-ka
pa-te-si-bi
sag-ba-mu-du
20 tu-ku bi-sig
sa^ar-dul-tag-bi
mu-dub
gis-BAN-'''
tu-ku bi-sig
2 5 sagar-dul-iag-bi- 2 o
\mu-d^b
\dingir\ J^in-gir-su-ra
a-sag ki-ag-\ga]-ni
gu-na + edin
under the yoke he has put.
Its dead ones
he buried.
The emblem of Gishgal
(and) its patesi
he subdued
(and) put under the yoke.
Its dead ones
he buried.
Gishban
he put under the yoke ;
2o of its dead ones
Col. IV.
he buried.
To Ningirsu
his beloved territory,
the Guedin,
temple) it goeth (fa, Br. 6io8, alAk:i)=z. mountain (or mountains) that is
higlier than a temple.
14. iu, Br. 11905; apSiu, H. W. B. 116; it may probably also stand for
afsdnu, yoke, H. W. B. ibid. ; sig. Br. 4420; sapdnu, H. W. B. 508 ; comp.
also Br. 4417, nad&, and 4418, naddnu. Lit. yoke + to + he subjugated. See
also Thureau-Dangin, R. A. iii. 132, note i.
15. See Cone of Entemena, i. 30.
i5. dub, Br. 3927; lamA, H. W. B. 379. Comp. Sanh. i. 59 : their corpses
I hung up on staves and siJ^irti dli ji-sal-me. Is the same idea to be found
here! Comp. however 1. 15. DUB may also be = Br. 3931; iapdku,
H. W. B. 679.
17. "su-nir, Br. l\(j% = 'iurinnu, H. W. B. 691. Thureau-Dangin : 'tour'' ?
Giigal. See ii. 13. Hommel (P. S. B. A. 1893, p. 108) thinks that GUgal-ki
is Babylon !
19. sag . . . du, Br. 3576 ; sandku, H. W. B. 504. This line has to be
read as a verb on account of the parallelism : iu-nir GiigalM-ka sag-ba-mu-du
axii. pa-te-si-bi tu-ku bi-sig. There is no proper name (Thureau-Dangin: 'el
son patesi Saghamoudou il renversa sous lejoug''~).
IV. 3. a-'iag=eklu.
4. Gu^na\-edin. Read Gu-edin-na. (7«-«A'»=propername. Comp Dec.
jter^ No. 2, col. iii. 7- That edin cannot be taken here as meaning simply
s^ru (Br. 4539), seems to be evident from the expression mu-ru in the inscrip-
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 87
5 su-na mu-ni-gi to his hand (power) he restored it
(again).
Unug-''' Erech
tion above cited : 49 ur dam ifl"'e''') Nind mai-bi-pad 2 edin mu-ru. The gu
in Gu-edin may be taken as meaning ni&tu (Br. 3216). As such it is parallel
to a-'iag. Edin, according to Br. 45271 ™^y niean bamalu, H. W. B. p. 177.
Comp. with this the Hebrew ni03, and with Gu-edin the niD3n DU. Have
we here the bamoth of Ningirsu, as we have in Dec. 2'°'', No. 2, the bamoth
of NinS ? Compare also the name (dingir) Innanna-Edin (Hommel). This
seems to be reasonable :
(i) This gu-edin is called an a-'iag ki-ag-ga = nardmu, a territory sacred to
Ningirsu.
(2) It had been lost for Ningirsu ; comp. Dec. 4'"', d', col. iii. 7-15 ;
Gu-nam-mi-de (?) Gunammide,
pa-te-H the patesi
gii-BAN ki of Gishban,
me dingir-ni-ku according to the command of his god
{ga)lu . . . da . . .
gu-edin-na the Guedin,
a-lag-gan ki-ag the beloved territory
(dingir) Nin-gir-su-ka of Ningirsu,
e-da-kii-e he devoured (destroyed).
Eannatum restored it {gi) again to his (Ningirsu's) power (iu-nd).
Hence I am prepared to accept Thureau-Dangin's view, 1. c. p. 69, note 1 ;
' Elle (i. c. the expression gu-edin) doit ttre prise comme un viritable nom propre
disignant un terntoire d^termini spiciakment consacri h Ningirsu^ Another
passage relating to the same event is found in D^c. 2'"'', fig. 5 (comp. R. A.
iv. p. 122, No. 2). The whole inscription reads :
Col. I.
idingir) Mn-gir-su To Ningirsu,
gud (dingir) En-lil-ra the hero of Bel,
E-an-na turn Eannatum,
pa-te-si patesi
Sir-pur-la-ki of Shirpurla,
"sag-azag-gi pad-da called by the glorious heart
{ilingir) l\fin& of NinS,
nin-en-na-ge his mistress,
kur-gu-zal-zal , the one who subdues all the lands
{dingir) Nin-gir-su-kage for Ningirsu,
dumu A-kur-gal the son of Akurgal,
pa-te-si patesi
J. "su, Br. 7069, emMu ; gl, Br. 6331, t&ru.
88
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
tu-ku bi-sig
Unu(g) + ^'+Uru
tu-ku M-sig
lo ki-'j''"^'*-) Uiu
tu-ku bi-sig
uru Az-^'
mu-gul
pa-te-si-bi
1 5 mu-iil
Mi-lim-^'-me
mu-^ul
A-ru-a-'''
mu-^a-lam.
20 E-an-na-tum
Sir-pur-la-ki-ka-ge
[Several lines broken away]
gii-BAN-ki
Gu ■i-na + edin
Col. II.
II. ba-du-a
mu-gal-lam-ma
(dingir) Nin-gir-su-ra
a-tag-gan ki-ag-ni
Gu + na + edin
hi-na mu-ni-gl
ki-sur-ra
gu-gu Gir-su-ki-ka
(dingir) Nin-gir-su-ra
su-na mu-na-gl-a
Lum-ma-gir-nun-ta-
iag-azag-gi-pad-da
mu mu-na-sd-a
he put under the yoke.
Ur
he put under the yoke.
Ki-Utu (=Larsa?)
he put under the yoke.
The city of Az
he destroyed ;
its patesi
he killed.
Milimme
he destroyed.
Arua
he blotted out.
Eannatum
of Shirpurla,
Gishban,
which to the Guedin
had come,
he blotted out.
For Ningirsu
his beloved territory,
the Guedin,
he restored it again to his power.
The boundary canal
alongside of Girsu
to Ningirsu
to his power he restored it again.
Lum-ma-gir-nun-ta4ag-
azag-gi-pad-da
he called it.
(The rest is broken away.)
13. Az, T. C. 209. See also iv. R''. 36, No. i, col. ii. 17, and Hommel,
P. S. B. A. 1893, p. no, who identifies^it with .i42«-/j><{»«, i. e. the Azu of the
elephants.
13. /w/, Br. 9506 ; iulputu, H. W. B. 383.
15. til, Br. 1519 ; m-&tu, H. W. B. 395 ; comp. also note to E. C. ii. and 278.
19. ga-lam, Br. 11850; IsuUuku, H. W. B. 280. Comp. Cone of Ente-
mena, vi. 20.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
89
mu-pad-da
{dingir) JSfin-gir-su + da + ka
kur-kur-ru
sag-e-ru-sig
25 mu gal+(gd)lu Uh-'''-ka
ni-zig-ga-a
E-an-na-tum
mu-pad-da
chosen (called)
by Ningirsu,
upon (those) lands
he brought distress.
In the year when the king of Uh
came (for the purpose of making
war),
Eannatum
chosen
Col. V.
{dingir) J^in-gir-su-ka-ge
An-ta-sur-ra
(dingir) Mn-gtr-su-ka-ta
Zu-zu
gal+ (ga)lu [lf\A-^'
[/A-^'-ku
mu-gaz
mu-^a-lam
ud-ba
by Ningirsu,
from the Antasurra
of Ningirsu,
Zuzu,
the king of Uh,
toUh
he crushed him
and blotted him out.
At that time
22. DA apparently stands here for ge; comp. iv. 27, 28; v. i. DA even
stands for KU = ana, 'for,' 'unto.' Comp. O. B. I. 86, 4 S.:ucl (dingir)
En-lil-li gu-zi e-na-de-a nam-en nam-higal-DA ( = ana 'iarrAti) e-na-da-tab-
ba-a ; and O. B. I. iii. i ff. -. (Dingir) Nin-din-dug-ga am, nin davi (several
lines missing) Lugal-iir-ge nam-ti dam-dumu-na-Da a-mu-iub, 'for the life
of his wife and child.' O. B. I. 112 shows clearly that DA = KU:
(Dingir) Nin-lil (dingir) En-lil-la{f) dumu Ad-da-ge ga (for gan, Br. 4039)
til-la-ku nam-ti dam-dumu-na-KU a-mu-na-'iub, 'To Ninlil and Enlil the
son of the Ada (= the temple of Enlil, O. B. I. 113, 6 ff.) presented it for
abundance of life, for the life of his wife and child.'
23. kur-kur-ru. See Barrel-Cyl. of Urukagina, ii. 10, and Lugalzag. ii. 32.
24. sag . . . sig, Br. 5565, ma^&su, H. W. B. 398 ; Br. 5587, iai&Jiu,
H. W. B. 649. For URU = ru, see Lugalzag. ii. 32.
26. nig-ga, Br. 2335 ; tebU, H. W. B. 698; comp. : itbd, ana epui kabli u
taJidzi. Thureau-Dangin, zig-ga = zdku ; see R. A. iv. 74, 11.
V. 2. An-ta-sur-ra. See leClercq,.il. pi. viii. No. i, col. ii. 1.
7. gaz, Br. 4721 ; §aWu, H. W. B. 294. ' I/Ji to U^,' i. c. all the way from
the Antasurra to Uh he smote and defeated him. U^- h is mentioned between
Gti-it^-fii and the Mh-gan-ki in iv. R'. 36, No. i, col. i. 12.
90
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
I o E-an-na-tum-ma
E-an-na-tum
mu u-?-ma-ru
mu ne-ne-ni
lum-ma-a
15 {dingir) ]S[in-gir-su-ra
a-ne{bU?)
mu-na-dun
Lum-ma-dim-sar
mu mu-na-sa
20 E-an-na-tum
{ga)lu enim-ma sig-ga
{dinsir) Nm-gir-su-ka
E-an-na-tum
pa-ie-si
25 \Sir\-la-^''^'^-\^pii\r-ra
{dingir) Jntianna-ge
ki-an-na-ag-ga-da
nam-pa + jz'+ te
Eannatum —
when Eannatum
had done . . .
and when his power
had sprouted —
for Ningirsu
water (a new canal ?)
he digged.
Lummadimshar
he called it.
To Eannatum,
he to whom eloquence is given
by Ningirsu —
to Eannatum,
pate si
of Shirpurla,
by Innanna,
Col. VI.
who loves him,
the patesiat
12. The third sign not clear. Thureau-Dangin reads; mu u-ru-mla]-
t\u']-[a ?], which he translates: ' lorsque puissant it fut devenu^ but adds
in a note ; ' tedure et traduction incertaines.' Thureau-Dangin's translation
of 11. 9-13 is improbable: ['£« ce jour-lh {c'est lui) Eanadou {gui a fait
ces-choses') Eanadou lorsque puissant ilfut devenu et lorsque,' &c.].
14. lum-ma, Br. 11 186; unnubu, H. W. B. 97, and Br. 11 187; uTsubu,
H. W. B. 141.
16. a-ne = water. Galet B has id (Br. 11647)-^!/; bil = eMu, ' new.'
17. dun, T. C. 188, Br. 9864; pitti U ndri, H. W. B. 552 : also = iirti,
H. W. B. 289.
18. Lum-ma-dim-'iar. This canal is also mentioned in R. A. iv. p. 25,
on a tablet from the time of Naram-Sin. Here it is recorded that it was
digged, while on the tablet of Naram-Sin it is mentioned as already existing.
Naram-Sin lived after Eannatum.
21. enim, Br. 508 ; am&iu, H. W. B. 81.
VI. i. ki-an-na-ag-ga-da. </« parallel to ^« in v. 26; comp. iv. 22. an-na,
infix signifying the object. Translate ' who loves him,' not ' loved by him ' ;
comp. R. A. ii. p. 149, rev., iii. i ; Cone of Entemena, v. 14.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
91
15
Str-la-^'-pur-ia
nam-gal-\- {ga)lu Ktl-'''
mu-na-ta-sum
E-an-na-ium-da
Elam sag-e-ru-sig
Elam kur-ra-na hi-g\
KU^' \sag'\-e-ru-sig
gal-\-{ga)lu Uh-J''
kur-ra-na (sic) bi-gi
E-an-na-tum
pa-ie-si
Sir-la-^'-pur-ge
kur-gu-zal-zal
{dingir) Nin-gir-su-ka-ge
Elamiu Sa^-^'
Gilgal-^'
A-su^ur ?-ta
tu-ku bi-sig
Ma-kal->''
An-ta-sur-ra
of Shiipurla
and the kingship of Kish
were given.
By (of) Eannatum
distress was brought upon Elam.
Elam to its mountains he made to
return.
Upon Kish he brought distress.
The king of Uh
to his land he made to return.
Eannatum,
patesi
of Shirpurla,
the conqueror of the totality of
lands
for Ningirsu.
Elam, Shah,
Gishgal,
in the Asuhur (neighbourhood?)
he put under the yoke.
Kish, Uh,
Makal,
in the Antasurra
Col. VII.
(dingir) Nin-gir-su-ka-ta
tu-ku bi-sig
of Ningirsu,
he put under the yoke.
15. kur-gu-zal-zal {sic), not kur-gu-gar-gar (Thureau-Dangin). NI is
clear, gu, Br. 3220, napjaru. Comp. iv. R. 23, 136: ug u-kalam-ma = bel
nap^ar mdti. zal-zal, Br. 5359 ; kamil, H. W. B. 587. Whole expression =
kdmii {Mmi-u) nap^ar (gu) mdti {kur). Comp. also Enannatnm I. in R. A.
iii. p. 31, 1. 6 ; D^c. s""'', d', col. ii. 2.
19. The second sign is not clear to me. Does Thureau-Dangin, who reads
"iu^ur, identify the sign with Br. 8615 as above transcribed ? See E. C. 381.
22. The second sign is not i/.ff i/^ (Thureau-Dangin), but KAL, Br. 951. A
king of MA- UR U-ki is mentioned in C. T. 1 2 1 46 ; comp. above, p. 30, note i .
92
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
15
(dingtr) ]\ftn-gir-su-ra
Lum-ma-dim-sar
mu-na-ui
sag-ku mu-ni-pa-kab
E-an-na-tum
a-sum-ma
{dingir) Nin-gir-su-ka-ge
gil-sir-du
Lum-ma-dim-sar
kir-^,6oo-gur-a-du
\mu\-m-ru
E-an-na-tum
{ga)lu enim-ma sig-ga
[dingir) Nin-gir-su-ka-ge
dingir-ra-ni
[dingir) Bun-gurf
e-gal Ti-ra-as
mu-na-ru
For Ningirsu,
the Lummadimshar
he established
and presented it as a gift.
Eannatum,
endowed with power
by Ningirsu,
on the border
of the Lummadimshar,
a basin (containing) 3,600 gur of
water complete
he built.
Eannatum,
to whom eloquence is given
by Ningirsu,
and whose god
is Dungur ?
the great house of Tirash
he built.
VII. 5. ui, Br. 5032, emidu.
6. Br. 5655, iardku, H. W. B. 691, and especially under hriktu, ibid. p. 692
= ana iirihti iiruk (Thnreau-Dangin). Comp. also E. C. 302 and 67.
10. gii-sir-du. The du probably stands for da ; comp. H. W. B. 404, sub
miliru ; gis-Ur-da = mij}ir ndri, K. 247, col. 1, and K. 2022, col. iii. 51.
12. kir, Br. 10209, ^' ^' ^- M^' DU^kal&lu, ' ganz sein' and prob-
ably also = kaldlu, umfassen, umschliessen ; see Br. 9142 and H. W. B. sub P73
pp. 331 and 332.
18. The name of this god has been variously read. Amiaud: Dun-sir;
Jensen : Sul-gur.
The second sign is T. C. 188 = Dun and Sul. The last sign is not yet
identified. Amiaud, who read sir, identified it with T. C. 154 and 198 bis,
p. 130. Jensen (K. B. iii'. p. 18, note 2 ; p. 14, note 8) lendgur = Br. 10808.
But see Thureau-Dangin, R. A. iii. p. 119, note 5. The name occurs, among
other places, in C6ue of Entemena, vi. 2 ; R. A. ii. p. 149, rev., col. iv. In
Tablette A of Entemena the name has an ' AJV' after it. Has this 'an'
to be translated : ' of heaven ' ! Comp. note to O. B. I. 115, ii. 6.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
93
Col. VIII.
dumu A-kur-gal
pa-ie-si
Sir-la-^'-pur-ge
pa-gis-bil-ga-ni
Ur-¥'ngtr) ]S[{„(^
pa-te-si
Sir-la-^'-pur-kam
He is the son of Akurgal,
patesi
of Shirpurla ;
his ancestor
is Ur-NinS,
patesi
of Shirpurla.
VIII. 4. fa-gH-bil-ga-ni. gii-bil, Br. 5713, abu. pa = any kind of officer
(P- 55. 4). Meissner, A. B. P. R. = amllu, ga = aldku. The whole may be
translated : {amilu) abu &lik {rnajiri)-ia = ' ancestor.' Because in this place
the pa-gH-bil-ga is at the same time ' grandfather,' we are not justified in
always translating it thus. Comp. C6ne of Entemena, col. i. 1. 35.
{diHgir) JSKn-gir-su
E-an-na-tum
pa-te-si
Sir-la-pur-^'-ge
mu-pad-da
{dingir) En-lil-ge
iAingir) ]^ind-ge
ga-zi-kii-a
{dingir) Mn-^ar-sag-ge
mu-shya
BRIQUE' OF EANNATUMi.
Ddc. 31, No. 2 a, b.
Col. I.
For Ningirsu
Eannatum,
patesi
of Shirpurla,
he who was chosen (called)
by Enlil
(comp. Galet A, i. 9)
Col. II.
by NinI,
he who was nourished with
the milk of life
by Ninharsag,
he who was called
' The inscription on this brick is apparently not complete. The end of
each column is missing. All the expressions occur also in Galet A ; it is,
therefore, not necessary to give any explanation.
94 EARLY Bj
IBYLC
INI^
iN HISTORY
5 {dingir) Innatina-ge
by Innanna,
dumu A-kur-gal
the son of Akurgal,
pa-k-si
the patesi
of ...... .
the
Col.
III,
mu-na-ru
he has built.
(dMgir) JSfind
For Nina
Nind-^'
the city of NinS
mu-na-ru
he has built,
5 E-an-na-tum-e
Eannatum.
Elam ^ar-sag igi-e (sic)-
■go-
Elam, a mountain higher
than a temple,
tu-ku bi-sig
. . .
under the yoke he has put
. . (comp. Galet A, iii. 1 7 if.
Col.
IV.
pa-ie-si-bi
sag-ba-mu-du
tu-ku bi-sig
sa^ar-dul-tag-bi
mu-dub
gis-BAN-f"
tu-ku bi-sig
sa\_^ar-dul-lag-bi^
lu-na mu-ni-g\
Unug-^'
tu-ku bi-sig
uru ^'-Az
mu-^ul
Col. V.
its patesi
he subdued
(and) put under the yoke,
its dead ones
he buried.
Gishban
he put under the yoke,
its dead ones he buried
(comp. Galet A, iv. 2 ff.),
to his power he restored
it again.
Erech
he put under the 3'oke.
The city of Az
he destroyed.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 95
Mi-ltm-^' (sic) Milim (sic; comp. Galet A, iv. i6)
mu-^ul he destroyed.
Upon ....
(comp. Galet A, vi. 9)
sag-e-ru-sig he brought distress.
E-an-na-tum Eannatum,
{ga)lu + s{g-{-em'm-ma-^ga he to whom eloquence is given
{dmgir) Nin-gSjr-su-kd\ by Ningirsu (comp. Galet A,
V. 2 1 if. and vii. 1 7 fF.).
In spite of the solemn promise of Gishban never to invade the
territory of Shirpurla again, or to pass over the boundary canal, it
very soon — probably at the end of the reign of Eannatum, or better,
at the beginning of that of Enannatum I. — becomes rebellious as
before. It invades the territory of Girsu under the leadership of
a certain Urlumma ^, patesi of Gishban, passes over the boundary
canals which Eannatum had made, removes the stfeles erected on
those canals in honour of Ningirsu, casts them into the fire, and
even destroys the sanctuaries which Eannatum had built on one of
these canals (i.e. the Namnundakigarra) in honour of Enlil,
Ninharsag, Ningirsu, and Utu, and lays waste the country (C6ne, ii.
28-iii. i.). Enannatum I. promptly arises to chastise 'those dogs'
who had dared to break their solemn promise. Whether this
battle was decisive or not is not evident. It seems, however, that
Enannatum I. gained but a slight victory over Gishban.
' This Urlumma, according to the narrative of the ' Cone,' was the son (?)
of Enakalli. It is probable that we have, as Thureau-Dangin already indi-
cated, R. A. iv. 40, the same persons as mentioned in le Clercq, ii. pi. x. No. 6
(see also Hommel and Menant in P. S. B. A. 1897, p. 89), which reads :
(dingir) EN-KI-gal i. e. For the great Enki,
ljr-¥ingir) Lum-ma Urlnmma,
lugal TE king of TE,
dumu En-i^kal-li son of Enakalli,
lugal TE king of TE,
E mu-na-ru has built a temple.
If this be true, then Urlumma, as well as Enakalli, were both patesis of
Gishban and kings of TE. (For TE, see Strassmaier, Liverpool Collection,
Nos. 136 and 149 : irsit TE-ki la ki-rib DIN-TIR-ki ( = Babylon).)
96 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
For Entemena ', the son of Enannatum, finds it necessary to
renew the war with Gishban. ' He puts Uriumma under the yoke,'
i. e. subdues him, forces him to return to his own country, and
pursues him to the very midst of Gishban. This triumphant victory
began with the decisive battle at the canal Lummasirta,in the territory
of Shirpurla. ' Of his (i. e. Urlumma's) army sixty men on the
side of the Lummasirta he left ' (Cone, iii. 20, 21). On account of
this severe loss Gishban fled. Entemena pursued after it, of
which pursuit he records that ' he left the bones of the soldiers
(of Uriumma) in the field ' (ibid. 2 2 ff.). Many of these soldiers of
Gishban must have fallen, so many, that Entemena was obliged
' to bury their dead in five different places ' (ibid. 25 ff.).
Arrived in Gishban, Entemena makes a certain priest of Innanna-
ah-''^ (or Nin-ab-^'), Hi by name, patesi of Gishban, probably after
having deposed Uriumma (C6ne, iii. 28-37). As a compensation for
the new dignity thus conferred, Entemena commands Hi to build
' Written En-te-me{n')-na. En = lord ; te-me{n)-na may be the syllabic
writing of the later temennu, Br. 7710; comp. H. W. B. 710. The mean-
ing then may be ' The lord of the temennu.'
His inscriptions :
D^c. 5, 3. Amiaud, ibid. xxxi.
Dec. 5''', I a. Translated by Tablette A, col. i.-iv.
Tablette A. R. A. ii. pp. 148, 149, translated ibid, by Oppert; R. A. iii.
p. 69 ff., translation by Henzey ; see also R. A. iv. p. 36 and R. A. iii. p. 119.
Tablettes B-F, not yet published, are said to be essentially the same as
Tablette A. Some ' Dispositions differentes ' of Tablettes B, C, D are given
by Heuzey in R. A, iii. p. 63.
D^c. 31, 3 (briqne). Jensen, K. B. iii'. p. 72 (also translated in R. A. ii.
87, by Oppert).
R. A. ii. p. 82. Jensen, 1. c. p. 74, No. 2.
Dec. 43 and 43''" (Vase d' Argent) [comp. Monuments et M^moires, fonda-
tion Eugene Piot, i.]. Translated in R. A. iv. p. 35 : comp. with this also
Dec. pi. 5"=; Monuments et M^moires, ii. p. 204 ; and R. A. iv. 36.
' Cone historique ' of Entemena, published by Thureati-Dangin in R. A. iv.
No. ii. pi. ii., and translated ibid. p. 37 ff.
O. B. I. Nos. 115, 117, 116; three fragments of the same vase. Comp.
Thureau-Dangin, R. S. 1897, p. 172.
British Museum, published by WincWer in Altbabyl. Keilschrifttexte, No. 4,
now also in C. T. 12061.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 97
in the territory of Karkar — which latter had also become rebellious
— boundary canals and some other buildings (C6ne, iv. 13-33).
The canal which Eannatum had built ' from the great river
(Euphrates?) to the Guedin' (C6ne, ii. i, 2), Entemena prolongs
to the Tigris (Cone, v. 9-1 1), and also repairs the other canals,
which had been destroyed more or less by the Gishbanites
(C6ne, iv. i if.), and dedicates them anew to Ningirsu and NinS.
Interesting also is the subscription of this C6ne :
' When the men of Gishban the boundary canal of Ningirsu and
the boundary canal of NinS, — for the purpose of ravaging these
territories — shall pass over, then may Enlil destroy the men of
Gishban and the men of the mountains ; may Ningirsu bring his
curse over them ; may he lift up his great power ; may the soldiery
of his (Entemena' s) city be filled with bravery ; may in the midst of
the city be courage in their hearts.'
This C6ne is indeed a splendid inscription, and of the greatest
historical value, giving us an insight into the state of affairs
at a period so remote as 4100 b. c. But let us hear the C6ne
inscription itself:
CONE OF ENTEMENA.
Col. I.
{Dingir) En-lil Enlil,
lugal-kur-kur-ra king of the lands,
ab-ba dingir-dingir-ru-ne-ge the father of the gods,
ha-gi-na-ni-ta upon his righteous command
g (dingir) ]S[in-gir-su Ningirsu
{dingir) ?.],i and ....
I. 3. ab-ba, Br. 3816, abu (Semitism !).
dingir-dingir-ru-ne. For uru = ru, see the Barrel-Cylinder of Urukagina,
col. ii. 10.
4. gi-na = Br. 2391, kinu (Semitism !).
6. The second sign is LAGABU, Br. 10151, with inserted IGI GUNtr.
It signifies the god of Giiban-ki ; comp. Lngalzag. ii. 40. i2 = copnla, Br.
6I3I-
H
98 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
ki-e-ne-sur marked off the boundary (of
the lands) by a well.
Me-silim Mesilim,
lugal Kl^-^'-ge king of Kish,
10 ka {''•"ST''-) Ka-di-na-ta upon the command of
his god Kadi,
KU gan-li-ra on the boundary (?) of
their territories,
hi-ba na ne-ru on that place a stHe he erected.
m Ush,
pa-te-si patesi
15 g'^-BAN-^'-ge ofGishban,
nam-enim-ma-dir-dir-ku according to evil intentions
7. sur, Br. 2975; masdru, H. W. B. p. 422. ki-e-ne-sur = ika irsitim
u{m)assifii ; so also ki-e-da-sur. In ki-sur the ki forms adjectives and nouns,
consequently /6«-f«?- = misru, H. W. B. 422. e = iku. The da and ne show
clearly that we have here a verb-fonn.
8. ME-SILIM. me = farsu, Br. 10374 '< H- W. B. 544.
Silim, Br. 9534, saldmu. Silim has the phonetic compl. ma in ii. 7.
The whole Parse-uiallim{a), R. A. iv. p. 35. For his inscription, see Dec.
!*«', fig. 2. There, as well as here, he is called ' king of Kli.' Here Ki^
has the sign ki, ' place,' but not in Dec. i'*"', fig. 2. This proves that ATJ =
Ki'^-ki, and not, as Hilprecht thinks (0. B. I. p. 270), = kiisatu.
10. The god Kadi was especially honoured in DUr-il-u, O. B. I. No. 125,
obv., 7. At the time of Ur IV. we find very often the proper name Ur-i^''"^''')
Ka-di.
11. gan, Br. 3177, eklu. KU here is parallel to ki-ba in 1. 12. Thureau-
Dangin = ' Au KU de ces champs {pu de leurs champs)! He then trans-
lates KU = Ala limiie (?).
12. na, Br. 1582, abnu; comp. O. B. I. No. 137, rev., 2 : mu na-ma^
(dingir) En-lil-la ba-ru, i. e. in the year when (Gimil-Sin) set up the sublime
stone ( = probably with an inscription) of B61. Na, ' stone,' then may stand
for ' stone with an inscription,' and because ' this inscribed stone ' generally
had the form of a sth\e it may be translated with Thureau-Dangin = stile.
Indeed it must be taken here = hiir iami or narii, Br. 1631, 1630, because
in 1. 18 this na is called na-ru-a, H. W. B. p. 481.
16. dir-dir, Br. 3751 ; at&ru, H. W. B. p. 248, with nam = abstr. noun.
atdru = iiberschiissig sein, iiber das gewohnliche Mass hinausgehen, conse-
quently = ambitious. Lit. according (^ku ^ana') to words (enimma) that
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
99
e-ag
na-ru-a-bi
ni-pad
20 edin Str-la-pur-^'-ku
ni-du
(dingir) ]S!in-gir-su
gud (<i'»e'r) En-lil-la(l)-ge
ka-si-di-ni-ta
25 sii-BAN-'^i-da
dam-ha-ra
e-da-ag
ka Kdingir) En-lil-la(t)-ta
sa-lus-gal ne-^uk
30 sa^ar-dul-tag-bi
edin-na ki-ba ni-m-ui
acted.
That stble
he took away ;
into the territory of Shirpurla
he went.
Ningirsu,
the hero of Enhl,
according to his (Ningirsu's)
righteous command,
with Gishban
a battle
he made (i. e. Mesilim).
Upon the command of Enlil
a scourge he brought over (them).
The dead ones
in a place of the field he buried.
exceed the measure, enim-ma, Br. 518, amdtu; this latter, like the Hebrew
^^'^, has a very wide significance, H. W. li. p. 81.
17. ag, Br. 2778, eplfiu.
18. Partly mutilated, na-ru-a; comp. 1. 13.
19. ni-pad. Thurean-Dangin takes pad in the sense of nasd^u, diplacer,
enlever, because in ii. 6-8 it is said that Eannatum na-ru-a Me-silim-ma
ki-bine-gi, i. e. the stele of Mesilim he brought back to its place (= restored).
Comp. also ii. 38, and T)ic. pi. s^s, d', col. i. 7 : na-ru-a-bi ba-ra-pad-du.
20. edin, Br. 4529, sjm.
23. gud ~ ur-sag = kardu, edlu ; comp. le Clercq, ii. pi. viii. col. i. 2, note.
24. si-di, Br. 3461 ff. ; i'saru, H. W. B. 312.
26. dam-^a-ra = iam^aru. ' Une curieuse trace de simitisme ' (Thureau-
Dangin). Sense : Mesilim, according to the righteous command of Ningirsu,
the hero of Enlil, fought a battle with Gishban.
29. sa-'iui-gal, in the inscription (StHe des Vautours), Dec. pi. 3 A, col. i., is
translated by Jensen, K. B. iii'. p. 16, ' der sa des u-gal {des grossen . . .).'
Thureau-Dangin takes it as an equivalent of mamitu, ' serment,' ox' anatheme'' ;
see H. W. B. p. 415. The above-quoted passage he translates: ' Moi Eanadou
le serment du roi outou.' Our passage here he translates : ' «» anathime il
(leva! For SC/S = kaidmu, see Dec. s^'^, d', col. i. 14; comp. also col. vi.
23 : i^-ni-^us.
30. sagar-dul-tag-bi. The same phrase occurs again in Galet A of
Eannatum, col. iii. 15, 21, 25, where Thureau-Dangin translates; 'de la lerre
H 2
loo EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
E-an-na-ium Eannatum,
pa-te-si patesi
§ir-la-pur-^' of Shirpurla,
35 pa-gil-bil-ga the ancestor
En-te-me-na of Entemena,
pa-te-si patesi
Sir-la-^'-pur-ka-ge of Shirpurla
En-a-kal-li and, (with) Enakalli,
40 pa-te-si patesi
^^-BAN-^i-da of Gishban,
ki-e-da-sur marked off the boundaries of
the land by a canal,
en tumulus sur les {cadavres) abandonnis' In this place he translates ' tells
funiraires.' The signs as they follow mean :
sugar, Br. 5083 ; efiru, H. W. B. 116 = earth, dust.
dul, Br. 9583 ; mulA, H. W. B. 411 = ' the filling, heaping up.'
tag, Br. 1410 ; ezibu, H. W. B. 34 = to leave, or r^Jiu, H. W. B. 618 Id.
1413 ; kardU, H. W. B. 598 = ?
1416 ; pita, H. W. B. 651 = to open.
In R. S. 1897, p. 68, note 4, Thureau-Dangin translates : ' mot h mot: terre
monceau-atandonni{s)-le{s) = le tumulus (funirmre)des {cadavres) abandonni''
while in R. A. iv. p. 43, note 5, he remarks, ' Le sens de " {cadavres) abandonnis "
ne peut,je crois, Hre conserve.'
Probably we have to take the whole expression in the sense of: those that
{bi = his : bi goes back to Giibati) were (are) left ifa^ for the heaping up {dut)
with earth {sagar) = the fallen ones, those that were slain, the dead. The
expression mu-dub in Galet A then would be = to bury. The whole might
be translated : ' those that fell (in the battle) he buried.' Indeed, ui-ui may
be considered as a parallel expression to mu-dub. ui, Br. 5041 = ridA =
rm i. in H. W. B. p. 612 (see Delitzsch under rm ii.) iii'. = to make to go.
LI. 30, 31 then might be translated : Its (sc. men = those oiGH-banki) that were
left for the heaping up with earth on a place of the field he made to go ( = buried).
The burying of the enemies' dead in the open field may have been considered
an additional disgrace (1) that could be brought upon the disturbers of peace.
35. That pa-gz§-bil-ga cannot mean 'grand-pire' (Thureau-Dangin) is plain
from this passage. Entemena was not the ' grandson ' of Eannatum, but his
nephew. It means ' ancestor ' ; comp. Galet A, viii. 4.
42. ki-e-da-sur - ki-e-ne -sur, i. 7.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
lor
Col. II.
e-bi id-nun-ia
Gu-edin-na-ku
ib-ta-ni-ud-du
e-ba na-ru-a
5 e-me-sar-sar
na-ru-a
Me-silim-ma
ki-hi ne-gt
edin si^-BAN-'^i-ku
10 nu-KU
Im-dub-\ba\
(dingir) Nin-gir-su-ka
Nam-nun-da-ki-gar-ra
bar {dingir) En-lil-la{t)
15 bar ^dingir) Nin-har-sag-ka
bar (di»gir') Nin-gir-su-ka
bar '^ingir) Uiu
ne-ru
h (d'»Sir) Nind
20 h ('*He'2>-) Nin-gir-su-ka
I gur-an
{ga)lue"-BAN^'
and a canal from the great river
to the Guedin
he made to go.
A stMe on this canal
he inscribed.
The stble
of Mesilim
to its place he restored.
Into the territory of Gishban
he did not go ravaging.
On the Imdubba
of Ningirsu
and on the Namnundakigarra
a sanctuary of Enlil,
a sanctuary of Ninharsag,
a sanctuary of Ningirsu,
a sanctuary of Utu,
he built.
On corn for Nina,
on corn for Ningirsu,
I karu
upon the men of Gishban
II. 1. e, Br. 5841 ; iku H. W. B. 51 ; Mishna, nplj).
id-nun. Thureau-Dangin : ' Vraisemblahlement V Euphrate : cf. les expressions
~\T\yt\ ?1"13n nrUn. Onpourralt encore songer h quelque grand canaV
3. ud-du, Br. 7873, 'asH.
5. sar, Br. 4336; "satdru, H. W. B. 651.
10. nu-ku. In qol. iii. i we have kur-kur e-ma-ku. Thureau-Dangin trans-
lates the former • il fienvahit (?) pas^ and the latter ' les conMes il envahit (?).'
KU, according to Br. 10526, has the meaning of ^aldku, H. W. B. p. 279 ii'
= zu Crunde richten, ausiilgen, vernichten.
11,13. = proper names.
21. giir, Br. 10809, kar& = s. 'ton.' According to Reissner, J. A. O. S. 18,
p. 372, equal to 3,600 gnr.
I02 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
^ar-ku ni-ku as tax he placed (?)
kud-du ba-us and as tribute he put upon.
25 400 gal-gur 400 great karu ( = 1,440,000 gur)
la-tur he made to bring.
bar h-bi nu-da-sud-sud da-dug He gave order not to spoil that grain.
Ur-lum-ma Urlumma,
pa-te-si pate si
30 ^'^-BAN-'^'-ge of Gishban,
e-ki-sur-ra of the boundary canal
(din^r) Nin-gir-su-ka of Ningirsu,
e-ki-sur-ra of the boundary canal
idingir) JSfind of Nind,
35 a-e-ni-mi-ud-du which (Eannatum) had made
to go out,
na-ru-a-bi their stfeles
Ml ba-sum into the fire he cast
ni-pad-pad and took away.
23. gar-ku ni-kii seems to be parallel to 1. 24, kud-dti ba-ui. gar-{ra) =
juimSu, Br. 8^62. kuti, Br. 3'; o, mtisu, 'tribute.' ^a-wj, «J, Br. 5032; emedu,
H. W. B. p. 80. Should kit have a similar meaning ? Thureau-Dangin : ' Le
sens de ce cas est obscur'
25. Here we have four numbers. Each number is expressed by a large
circle with inserted small circle. This, according to Thureau-Dangin, is equal
to 10 sar or 36,000 gvir. If I gur = 3,600 gur, as Reissner says, we would
get 4x36,000x3,600 = 518,400,000 gur; comp. R. S. 1897, p. 172. This sum
seems almost incredible, especially when we take into consideration that we
have here not only giir(s) in general, but 'great gurs,' giirgal, which must
contain more than giir alone. This also was felt by Eisenlohr (Z. A. xii.
p. 239), who says : ' Wo sie (that is, the old forms for numerals) mit karA . . .
ausammentreffen, bedeutet \~\ offenbar 10x3,600, also 36,000 ^«r, (q)
360,000 gur' According to this calculation we would have here = 4xioxiox
3,600 ^>-= 1,440,000 gur (not giir=karfl); and in iv. 11 = 10x3,600 gur =
36,000 gur (not 3,600 gur = kar(l).
27. bar=piristu, H.W. E. 543. sud-sud=ra^diu, H.W. B. p. 617.
31. e-ki-sur-ra. Comp. i. 7 and ii. i.
35. a . . . ud-du on account of context must he = ud-du in ii, 3.
37. bil^iiatu. sum = nad&, Br. 4417.
38. fad. Comp. i. 19.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
103
bar-sub-a dingtr-ru-ne
40 Nam-nun-da-ki-gar-ra
ab-ru-a
ni-gul-gul
The sanctuaries dedicated
to the gods,
(which) on the Namnundakigarra
had been built,
he destroyed,
Col. III.
kur-kur e-ma-KU
e-ki-sur-ra
{.dingir) Nin-gir-su-ka-ka
e-ma-ta-bal
En-an-na-tum
pa-te-si
Sir-la-^'-pur-ge
gan U-gig-ga
a-sag-gan (*«.f'''-) Nin-
gir-su-ka-ka
gis-ur-ur-ku e-da-lal
En-ieme-na
dumu ki-ag
En-an-na-tum-ma-ge
the lands he ravaged,
the boundary canal
of Ningirsu
he crossed over.
Enannatum,
patesi
of Shirpurla,
in the field
of the territory of Ningirsu
upon the dogs he poured
out his terror.
Entemena,
the beloved son
of Enannatum,
39. dingir-ru. See i. 3. iub, Br. 1444 ; 'lardku,\l. W. B. p. 691.
42. gul, Br. 8954; abdtu, H.W. B. p. 12.
III. I. ku. Comp. ii. 10.
4. bal, Br. 266 ; ebhu, to cross over.
8. The expression "ii-gig is not quite clear. GIG also occurs in several
tablets of the E. A. H. collection, designating there ' spelt.' SA-GIG may
be here the ripe spelt {SA, Br. 4963 = ««?«).
10. In Dec. pi. 4'"', d', vi. i, we have gii-ur-ur-e e-da-lal.
For ur-ur-ku, comp. Br. 11297, kalbu (written ur-ku).
For ur-ur-e, comp. Br. 11 304, aJiA = stranger, enemy, ur alone = nakru,
see H. W. B. p. 41 ; hence this line may also be translated : upon {ka=ana) the
enemies (giS-ur-ur ; gi'i=edlu or zikaru) he poured out.
lal, Br. 101 12 ; iapdku, H. W. B. 679 = tabdku, H. W. B. 699; and com-
pare with this such expressions as : melamml bH-dtia atbuk, ot pul^l melamml
eliiunu atbuk.
104 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
lu-ku ni-ni-sig put them under the yoke.
15 Ur-lum-ma Urlumma
ba-da-kar he made to return ;
sag e^BAN-'^'-ku up to the very midst of Gishban
e-gaz he crushed him.
ne-ni erim-6o-an 60 men of his army
20 gu (''^Lum-ma-sir-ta-ka on the side of the Lummasirta
e-ku-kid he left ;
nam-{ga)lu-kal-ba of that soldiery
gir-pad-du-bi its bones
14. See Galet A of Eannatum, col. iii. 14, note.
16. kar, Br. 7739; H. W. B. p. 46. Thureau-Dangin translates: 'fut
payi de retour' ; and adds in the note: 'fimagine que kar correspond id
comme dans ces contrats (i.tz.de Tipoque de Sargon, see R. A. iv. No. iii.)
A eteru " rembourser." Le sens de " enlever, prendre" aur ait difficilement sa
place id.'
19. ne, Br. 9184, emAku. The numeral, according to Thureau-Dangin,
R. S. 1897, p. 172, is = 60.
20. gu, Br. 3215 ; kis&du, H. W. B. 359, ' Ufer' ; comp. fjna.
21. kid, Br. 1410, eslbu. The ku, according to Thureau-Dangin, is
' prifixe verbal.' Comp. also Dec. pi. 31, No. 3, col. iv. 1 ff., which ought to
be read ud-ul-la-ku nam-ti-la-ni-ku (dingir) Nin-gir-su-ra E-ninn& a-ge-tm-ku-
tum, and be translated : ' dans les jours & venir pour la vie {dEnUmind)
en thonneur de Ningirsou dans I'Eninnou puisse (the AB-gi or Et-gi)
subsister! Jensen, K. B. iii'. p. 74, reads that passage : ud-ul-la-ku nam-ti-
la-ni-ku {dingir) Nin-gir-su-ra I-ninnA-a (^i + na -k- zida + gin, lies dafUr)
gi-zida gin-na ; and translates : ' \und der\ auf ewige Zeiten fiir sein Leben
dem Ningirsu in Ininnu eine FuUe Korns festgesetzt hat.' Comp. also
Jensen, note *, ibid. ; see Lugalzaggisi, iii. 33 ; Dec. 3'''", d', col. i. last line,
and especially note to C. T. 23287, 1. 12.
22. The third sign occurs again in O. B. I. No. 37, col. iii. 24, and by
Thureau-Dangin was made equivalent to Br. 951 ; see E. C. 386. An expres-
sion amH KAL ■"t^ occurs in K. 492, B. A. i. p. 628, viz. amll KAL
"^^ am-mu-te ni-^r-ru-ub, which Delitzsch translates : 'Jene Soldaten (?)
werden wir . . ,'; and in his note he remarks : ' JJarf vielleicht kalU
'.' Diener" spec. " Soldaten " (comp. B. A. i, p. 244 f. = tuildti, lit. helpers,
soldiers) umsckrieben werden?' Comp. also S. A. Smith in P. S. B. A.
X. 164.
23. gir-pad-du, Br. 9224; A. L', No. 250 = ' Knochen, Gebeine' and
Guyard, Notes de Lexicogr. Assyr. § 26.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
105
edin-da e-da-kid-kid
25 sa^ar-dul-tag-bi
ki-^-a
ni-mi-dub
ud-ba Hi
sanga Innanna-ab-'''-kam
30 Gir-su-^'-ta
s^BAN-i^'-ku
kar-dar-ra-a
e-du
ll-li
35 nam-pa-te-si
e'^BAN-Z^'-a
su-e-ma-ti
e-ki-sur-ra
on the plain he left.
His dead ones (i. e. Urlumma's)
in five places
he buried.
At that time Hi
was priest of Innanna-ab.
From Girsu
to Gishban,
beating the enemy,
(Entemena) marched.
Hi,
the patesiat
over the Gishbanites,
he made to accept.
The boundary canal
Col. IV.
{dingir) Niii-gir-su-ka
e-ki-sur-ra
(dtngir) JSfind
Im-dub-ba
(dingir) Nin-gir-su-ka
gu ('^ Jdigna-ku ghl-la
gu-gu Crir-su-^'-ka
of Ningirsu,
the boundary canal
of Nina,
the Imdubba
of Ningirsu,
which goeth to (the side of)
the Tigris
alongside of Girsu,
24. edin-da. da = suffix ; comp. Galet of Eannatum, iv. 22, note.
kid. See 1. 21.
25. See i. 30.
27. See i. 30.
29. kam, suffix = he is (was).
32. kar-dar, Br. 6537 j sdkipu, H. W. E. p. 498 ; comp. ii. R. 19, i6, 18 b,
kar-dar-mi = sa-kip ta-fya-si. Thureau-Dangin : ' victoneusement.'
37. ti, Br. 1700, lakA ; iu-ti, Br. 1701, ma^dra. Either ' he received ' or
' peut-itre hi . . . ti est-il ici pour le shaphel de liqu et faut-il traduire
(^Entimitut) fit prendre A. Hi le patisiat de Gishban!
IV. 6. g&l-la, Br. 2238, feJ«2, and 2253, sakdnu.
7. gu-gu. Occurs again in Dec. 2*"', fig. 5 ; see iii. 20, and Br. 3212, idu.
io6
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
Nam-nun-da-ki-gar-ra
[dingir) Nin-har-sag-M
I o a-e-ni-mi-ud-du
u Sir -la-''' -pur lo gicr-an
ni-rug
En-teme-na
pa-te-si
1 5 Sir-la-'^'-pur-ge
bar-e ha-dug
Ili-hu
(ga)lu ge-ku gt-gi-a
Hi
20 pa-te-si
f'^-BAN-'^'-a
a-sag-gan Kar-kar
nin-ne-ru dug-dug-gi
e-ki-sur-ra
25 (dingir) Nin-gir -su-ka
e-ki-sur-ra
{dingir) ]S[ind
gh-\kam />]
ni-mi-dug
30 A n-ta-sur-ra-ta
e ¥'"£''') Gal-dim-zu-ab-ka-ku
the Namnundakigarra
of Ninharsag
he made to go out.
On corn for Shirpurla 10 karu
(=36,000 gur)
he added.
Entemena,
patesi
of Shirpurla,
gave an order :
to Hi,
a man whom he had brought
into prosperity,
to Hi,
the patesi
of the Gishbanites,
(in) the territory of Karkar,
who had pronounced (words
of) wickedness,
a boundary canal
of Ningirsu,
a boundary canal
of Nina,
to make
he commanded.
From the Antasurra
to the temple of Galdimzuab
10. Comp. ii. 35.
11. For numeral, see R. S. 1897, p. 173, but especially note to ii. 25.
12. rug = rudd-U, Br. 168.
18. ge-ku. ge, Br. 4039, du^du ; gi-gi, Br. 6331, tdru = Ifa ana du^di
utirru.
23. nin-ne-ru, Br. 12056 ; H. W. B. p. 611.
dug-dug-gi = dabdbu, H. W. B. 208.
28. gh, Br. 5421, 'iak&nu. The last sign is not clear. Thureau-Dangin
supplies kam as above given, and thinks ' kam parati ttre id suffixe verbal.'
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
107
35
im-la-ni ud-du-ne
ni-mi-diig
i^dingir) JEn-Ul-li
{Aingir) Nm-iiar-sag-ge
NU na-sum
to erect buildings (of clay ?)
he commanded.
By Enlil
and Ninharsag
a decision (?) was given ;
Col. V.
En-teme-na
pa-te-si
Str-la-^'-pur
mu-pad-da
5 {dingir) Nin-gir-su-ka-ge
ka-si-di^^''''^''-).En-Ul-la{l)-ia
ka-si-di (d'»Jri'') Nin-gir-su-ka-ta
ka {sic)-si-dt idingir) Nind-ta
e-hi (''') Idigna-ta
10 id-nun-ku
e-ag
Nam-nun-da-M-gar-ra
ur-bi na-a mu-na-ni-ru
lugal ki-an-na-ag-ga-ni
15 {dingir) Nin-gtr-su-ra
Entemena,
patesi
of Shirpula,
chosen
by Ningirsu
upon the righteous command
of Enlil,
upon the righteous command
of Ningirsu,
upon the righteous command
of Nina,
a canal from the Tigris
to the great river
he made.
The Namnundakigarra
its foundation with stone he built ',
unto the king, who loves him,
viz. unto Ningirsu
32, im-ba-ni. Thureau-Dangin : ' im-ba paratt avoir un sens analogue cl
celui cTim-ru-a qui correspond hpitqu^ See H. W. B. p. 554 :
. . . BARi?) AG- A =pit-ku.
IM KAK-A = pit-ku. ' Than oder Lehmgebilde'
36. nu-ntt, Br. 1969 = Itru, ' meat.' UZU = iiru - ' meat,' but also
' oracle.' It is possible, therefore (as Thureau-Dangin thinks), that nu = "stru
in the sense of ' meat ' and ' oracle ' ; cnrap. H. W. B. 634 and 655.
V. 8. ka {sic). The original has sag.
13. ur, Br. 4832 ; H. W. E. p. 142. Net = Br. 5229 : abnu.
14. ki-an-na-ag-ga-ni. Comp. Galet A of Eannatum, vi. i.
io8
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
nin ki-an-na-ag-ga-ni
(dingir) JSfind
ki-bi mu-na-gl
En-teme-na
20 pa-te-si
Sir-la-pur-^'
pa-sum-ma
(dinpy) En-lil-la{l)
gu-tug{-pi) sum-ma
25 {dingiy) EN-KI-ka
sag-pad-da
(dingir) JSfind
pa-te-si gal
(dingir) Nin-gir-su-ka
30 {ga)lu dug dingir-ru-ne tub-ba
(and) unto his mistress, who
loves him,
viz. Nini,
he restored it.
Entemena,
patesi
of Shirpurla,
to whom a sceptre was given
by Enlil,
to whom intelligence was given
by Enki,
who was chosen by the heart
of Nini ;
the great patesi
of Ningirsu,
the one who was endowed with
the oracles of the gods.
Col. VI.
dingir-ra-ni
Dun-gur
nam-ti
En-teme-na-ka-ku
ud-ul-la-ku
(dingir) Niit-gir-su-ra
(dingir) JSfind
ge-na-me-tum
his god is
Dungur.
For the life
of Entemena,
until future days
(in honour) of Ningirsu
and Nina,
may (this) stand :
24. gis-tug(^-pi). Comp. Lngalzag. i. 17.
30. dingir-ru-ne. Comp. i. 3. tub-ba, Br. 10567, nalbuiu. (gd)lu dug . . .
iui-ba probably = the one who was endowed (^TUB - labdsu iv', Br. 10533)
with the oracles ((/«f) of . . . Thnrean-Dangin : ' V executeur (f) des ordres
des dieux.'
VI. i. See Galet A of Eannatum, col. vii. 18.
5. ud-ul-la-ku. Comp. Urakagina, le Clercq, ii. pi. viii. col. v. 1.
8. le-na-me-tum ^sic). Thnreau-Dangin reads : ge-na-tum-me, which also
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
109
I o e-hi-sur-ra
(dingir) Nin-gir-su-ka-ka
e-ki-sur-ra
{^dinsir) Nind-ka
h-zid-ku
1 5 a-sag-gan tum-ne
an-ta bal-e-da
(ga)lu ff'^BAN-^'-^e
(gd)lu kur-ra-^e
{dingir) En-lil-li
20 ^e-ga-lam-me
(dingir) Nin-gir-su-ge
sa-'iul-gal-ni
Ih-ni-lus
lu-mag ne-ma^-ni
25 an-ta ^e-ga-gh
nam {gd)lu-kal uru-na
su-ih-na-zi
lag uru-na-ka
^a-ni-gaz-lid-lag-gi
when the men of Gishban
the boundary canal
of Ningirsu,
and the boundary canal
of Nina
— for the purpose of bringing
this land under their power —
should cross over,
then may he the men of Gishban,
and may he the men of the mountain,
may he, Enlil,
destroy them ;
may Ningirsu
his scourge
bring over them,
his sublime hand and sublime
foot
may be high (he lift up) ;
may the soldiery of his city
be (filled) with power ;
may in the midst of his city
be courage in their hearts !
is possible. DU = turn, Br. 4884, khiu k&nu ; comp. Galet A, i. 2. Comp.
also Dec. pi. 31, No. 3, col. iv., and C6ne, col. iii. 21.
14. h-zid-ku, Brr23i2; imnu. Here = ana imni-iunu.
15. turn, Br. 9058, ab&lu, babdlu.
16. an-ia, Br. 459, el{l. bal, Br. 266, ebiru; 270, nabalkutu, 'to cross
over.' bal-e-da = e-da-bal ; comp. iii. 10.
17. The ^'e at the end of 11. 17, 18 stands for ^«. See Hommel,S.L. p. 142,4.
20. ga-lam, Br. 11850 ; ^ulluku, H. W. B. p. 280.
22. soriui-gal. Comp. i. 29.
25. gh-gh, Br. 5430, baU.
26. galu-kal. Comp. iii. 22.
27. set here, as in 23, verbal prefix ; comp. Br. under ' verb-forms.' iw
= emii^a. zi, Br. 2306, basH. The particle of the optative is omitted.
29. lidriag, Br. 8897, libbu ; gaz-lid-sag-gi, according to Thnreau-Dangin kh
Ubbi; see H. W. B. 590, ' Le tout une forme verbale forgie avec gaz-lid-lag-gi!
no EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
Before we leave this important Cone inscription of Entemena,
it will be necessary to say a word or two about the situation of
Gishban * and Kish.
Hilprecht, in O. B. I. p. 269, asks us to 'throw a glance' upon
Sachau's plan of the city of Harran, which is to be found in his
Raise in Syrian und Mesopotamien, in order to convince our-
selves that Harran was the city which is called here £'^BAN-^'.
He says : ' Sachau, who gave us the first accurate sketch of this
city, finds it very natural that " Arabic writers — especially
Albirfint, edit. Sachau, p. 204 — could conceive the idea of com-
paring it with the form of a half-moon." ' And because
Hilprecht sees in this half-moon the form of a bow, he concludes
s'i^BAN-^', 'the city of the bowV is the city that looks like a 'half-
moon,' as Harran does in Sachau's plan of that city. Noldeke
already in January, 1897, before this C6ne was published, remarked
on this identification (see Z. A. xi. p. 108) :
' Von Harran, wo von Alters her bis in spate Zeiten der Mondgoit
besonders verehrt wurde, sagt ndmlich BirUnt {ChronoL, arab. Text,
205, 17) « habe {im Grundplan) die Gestalt eines Mondes oder eines
Tailasan. Der von Sachau {Reisen, p. 223) gegebene Plan zeigt
nach Hilprecht die Aehnlichkeit mit einem Halbmond, also auch mit
einem Bogen : somit musste Harran die Bogenstadt Klsh (sic; read
e'^-BAN-^'") sein. Aber erstlich steht noch nicht /est, dass BirHni
den Halhmond meint. Wie ein Tailasan — ein Tuck, das fiber den
Turban und [resp. oder) die Schulter geworfen wird — in Wirklichkeit
aussah, ist mir trotz der Beschreibung in Dosy's Diet, des Vete-
ments, s. v. leider nickt Mar geworden. Aus den Umfassungslinien auf
dem von Sachau gegebenen kleinen Plan der Stadt Idsst sich aller-
dings mit einiger Phantasie' die Gestalt eines Halbmondes erkennen,
aber Phantasie gehort dazu', da nirgends eine grossere Rundung
erscheint, und mit einem Bogen hat die Zeichnung ziemlich wenig
' For the reading oieiSBAN-ki, see p. 74, note i.
^ The very fact that the second sign is not BAN speaks against Hilprecht's
identification.
^ Underlined by me.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY III
Aehnlichheii. Wollte man die aber auch finden : es giebt genug Stddie,
deren Grundplan wenigstens ebenso gut einen Bogen darstellt ah
ffarran. Schliesslich ist es dock uherhaupt nicht besonders wahr-
scheinlich, dass die Bezeichnung ah " Bogenstadt" auf die Linien der
Umfassung gehe.'
So far Noldeke. He is undoubtedly correct. The C6ne
inscription of Entemena does not leave any doubt as to the real
situation of Gishban. In col. i. 32 ff. we expressly read that
Eannatum ' marked off the boundaries of the land ' with Enakalli,
patesi of Gishban, i.e. they determined the boundaries of their
respective territories. After having done this, Eannatum digs
a canal from the 'great river' to the Guedin, and makes the
Gishbanites swear ' never to trespass this boundary canal.'
From this, then, it follows plainly that Gishban must have been
the immediate neighbour of Shirpurla-Girsu. And because this
canal went from the ' great river ' to the Guedin, and was later
on prolonged to the Tigris, it seems very reasonable to suppose
that this great river was the Euphrates. Gishban must thus have
been situated on or towards the Euphrates. Heuzey recently has
published (Rec. de Trav. xix. p. 63) a date of a tablet which he
found at Djokha, a I'ouest de Wasit el-ffai (see the chart in
Hommel, Geschichte, p. 274). That tablet is from the time of the
fourth dynasty of Ur, and reads :
ud-ba Ur-^'''"Si'-) NE-Sb i.e. At that time Ur-Nesu
pa-te-si si^-BAN-'''-kam was patesi of Gishban,
Mu An-sa-an-^' ba-^ul in the year when [Dungi III.]
devastated Anshan.
'Djokha, b. touest de Wasit el-JHai! however, lies north of Shirpurla ;
consequently Gishban was the immediate northern neighbour of
Shirpurla, and Shirpurla being situated east of the Shatt-el-Hai,
Gishban probably had a territory extending from (the direction of)
the Euphrates to the east of the Shatt-el-Hai, and north of Shirpurla.
The Guedin, the sacred territory of Ningirsu, accordingly, must
112 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
have been situated between the city of Shirpurla itself and the
territory of Gishban east of the Shatt-el-Hai ^
Kish, we have seen, had for some time possession of Shirpurla,
and Eannatum in course of time became ' king of Kish.' This
Kish mentioned in these oldest texts is undoubtedly identical
with the ' city of Kish ' referred to in the later inscriptions.
According to these inscriptions its position lay east of Babylon.
It cannot be without reason that Entemena prolonged the boundary
canal between the territories of Gishban and Shirpurla, digged
by Eannatum, to the Tigris. No doubt his object was to shut
off Kish. Kish must therefore be placed further east of Gishban,
whose neighbour it was, but north of Shirpurla and on the river
Tigris.
The building operations of Entemena, which it is unnecessary
to consider here in detail, are sufficiently described in the inscrip-
tions which follow. By comparison with the inscriptions of
Urukagina, it will be seen that the buildings to which Entemena
refers were not actually constructed by him, but only repaired.
Special attention should be given to the ' Vase d! Argent I an
exquisite piece of art, which was presented by Entemena to
Ningirsu, and placed upon the ' altar in the sanctuary of the god
of Girsu,' as a lasting remembrance of the king's piety and
devotion.
ENTEMENA.
Tablette A. R. A. ii. 148, 149; comp. also Ddc. 5^3, i, a.
Obverse.
Col. I.
(dingir) Nin-gir-su For Ningirsu,
gud (dingir) En-lil-ra the hero of Enlil,
En-teme-na Entemena,
' This situation of the Guedin, i. c. north of Shirpurla, may help us to
understand the meaning of the word, because the ' gods were considered to
dwell in olden times in the north.'
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
113
pa-te-si
Sir-la-¥-pur
dumu En-an-na-tum
pa-te-si
Sir-la-^'-pur-ka
dumu-ka
Ur-idingir) JSfind
gal-^{ga)lu
Sir-la-pur -^''-ka-ge
(dingir) Nin-gir-su-ra
A b-bi-ru
mu-na-ru
2 rus
e igi-zi-bar-ra,
mu-na-ru
{dingir) Lugal-Erim-'''-ra
e-gal Erim-^'-ka-ni
Col. II.
Col. III.
patesi
of Shirpurla,
son of Enannatum,
patesi
of Shirpurla,
grandson
of Ur-Nina,
king
of Shirpurla —
for Ningirsu
the Abbiru
he has built.
2 7? ra (towers?)
for the ' house of regard '
he has built.
For Lugal-Erim
his temple of Erim
Col. IV.
mu-na-ru he has built.
idingtr) ]s[ind For Nina
e-zikum + ra + ka-lum-ma the Ezikum (i. e. ' the house of
heaven') for the dates
II. 2. dumu-ka is in apposition to Enannatum. Enannatum was the ' grand-
son ' of Ur-NinS, the succession being : Ur-Nin^ — Akurgal — Enannatum.
Dumu-'iag, on the contrary, means the ' firstborn.'
- 7. The Ab-bi-ru\% mentioned here for the first time. Thureau-Dangin reads :
Ab-dug (E. C. 380) — so at least in D^c. s*". See for the same or a similar bi
O. B. I. 1 10.
III. 2. The second sign is that for rui (Br. 8598 ; T. C. 206; E. C. 261).
It has been mistaken for ki'i, T. C. 204. What it means here is hard to
tell, rus = izzu and iuBu. Hicvev/e to read A-H US aadtisiDslate: A-HC/S,
the house of his regard he has built !
3. tgi-zi-bar-ra. See Lugalzag. i. 13; Gudea B, ii. 10; iii. 7. Heuzey : ' /a
maison du regard favorable'
6. Erim. See Jensen, K. B. iii'. p. 21 to Ur-Ba'u, ii. 2 ; iv. 8, 9.
IV. 3. The second sign is very doubtful. I would like to identify it with
I
114 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
mu-na-ru he has built.
g (dingir) EN-KI t"or Eiiki,
gal+{gd)lu king
Urud-ug-'''-ra of Eridu,
zu-ab e-kur SIR-ra an abzu for the long canal
Col. V.
mu-na-ru he has built.
{dingir) Nin-har-sag-ga-ge For Ninharsag
gi-ka-na her gi-ka (plantation ?)
ter-azag-ga of the holy forest
5 mu-na-ru he has built.
{dingir) Nin-gir-su-ra For Ningirsu
Reverse.
Col. I.
An-ia-sur-ra the Antasurra
E-me {s\c)-ne{lam)-M-kur-kur-ra- for an Emenebikurkurra
a-ku
mu-na-ru he has built.
{dingir) En-lil-la(t) For Enlil
5 e- Ad-da the Eadda
im-sag-ga of imsagga
Br. 10221 : zikum = 'iam^; comp. also E. C. 451. The RA can then be taken
as post-position to ka-lum-ma. See also R. A. iii. p. 121, and note 4, ibid. If,
however, the second sign has to be read GUR, the whole line would contain
the name of the house.
8. The third sign is ' E! with inserted KtJR-(BAB). It also occurs in
D6c. 3*"', d', col. i. 4 \e-'\kur-e-bi ki-bal ba-ra-ag-ga. For KtlR-E, see
H W. B. p. 5i = j/J«,/3i^«. ^^ = post-position. See also note to D^c. 3''',
d', col. i. 4, above.
V. 3. Plantation (Oppert, Ileuzey, Thureau-Dangin). But why? ter, Br.
7679; kiltu, H. W. B., p. 359; ier azag-ga^kistu ellitu.
Reverse. I. i, 2. See Urukagina, le Clercq, ii. pi. viii. No. 1, col. ii. i.
6, 6. Barrel-Cyl. of Urukagina, iii. 2 ; le Clercq, ibid. col. iii. 8, 9, where
we have the E- Ad-da of his imsagga. E-Ad-da = ' the temple of the father."
Comp. also O. B. I. No. 112, and ibid. pp. 263, 264 : dumu adda-ge\ O. B. I.
No. 113, 6, and ibid. p. 264 note : diip-sar ad{a) e {dingir) En-Hl-ka-ge.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
1'5
mu-na-ru
e (dingir) Ga-ium-dug
'he has built.
The house of Gatumdug
Col. II.
mu-ru
^ag-pad-da
mu-na-ru
{dingir) JSlind
gi-ka-na tna^-ni
mu-na-ru
ud-ba En-teme-na-ge
he has built.
For Nina,
(who has) chosen (him) in (her)
heart,
[the . . .] he has built.
For Nind
her sublime gi-ka (plantation)
he has built.
At that time by Entemena,
Col. III.
gal-\- (ga)lu ki-an-na-ag-ga-ni for the king who loves him,
(dingir) Nin-gir-su-ra for Ningirsu,
^ ^^ii + G^^^(sic)-^a-w(sic) his storehouse
mu-na-ru was built.
5 En-teme-na Entemena,
Col. IV.
(ga)luE-KAS+GAR
(dingir) Nin'-gir-su-ka ru-a
dingir-ra-ni
(dingir) Dun-gur-an
who the storehouse
for Ningirsu has built,
his god is
Dungur of heaven.
II. 3. Heuzey : ' la predilection de son caur^ but adds in the note : ' On feut
douter sHl s'agit cCauvre d part ou de la plantation mentionnie d. la suite.'
Probably the name of the building is left out here. In Tablette D, vii, we
have : For Nina, who has chosen him in her heart, ' her holy plantation ' he
built ; We ought to read this here also. For the expression, see D^c. 6, 4, 1. 6 ;
Dec. 7, col. i. 9 ; Gudea B, ii. 8 ; D^c. 31, 3 ; ii. i ; iii. i. See also R. A.
iii. p. 1 19, notes 3 and 4.
III. 3. See le Clercq, ii. pi. vili. col. ii. 6.
IV. 4. Galet A ofEannatum, vii. 17.
I 2
Il6 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
ENTEMENA.
D^c. pi. 5, No. 2.
(dingir) Qa-tum-dug To Gatumdug,
am Sir-la-pur-'''-ra the mother of Shirpurla,
En-teme-na Entemena,
pa-te-si patesi
5 Sir-la-^'-pur of Shirpurla,
{ga)lu ^-(*».?'>') Ga-tum-dug ru-a who has built the house of
Gatumdug,
dingir-ra-ni his god
Dun-gur-an is Dungur of heaven.
VASE D' ARGENT OF ENTEMENA.
Ddc. pi. 43 and 43^'^.
(iingir) Nin-gir-su To Ningirsu,
gud (dingir) En-lil-ra the hero of Enlil,
En-teme-na Entemena,
pa-te-si patesi
5 Sir-pur-la-''' of Shirpurla,
sag-pad-da chosen by the heart
(dingir) jsfind of NinS,
pa-te-si-gal the great patesi
(dingir) JSfin-gir-su-ka of Ningirsu,
10 dumu En-an-na-tum the son of Enannatum,
pa-te-si patesi
Sir-pur-la-'^'-ka-ge of Shirpurla —
lugal ki-an-na-ag-ga-ni to the king who loves him,
{dingir) JSfin-gir-su-ra to Ningirsu,
1 5 nigin ku-la^-^a zal-da this vase (recipient) of shining
silver,
(dingir) Ntu-gir-su-ge ab-ta-gu-e (which) Ningirsu had commanded
(to make),
mu-na-gim he made.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 117
nam-ti-la-ni-ku For (the preservation of) his hfe
(dingir) Nin-gir-su unto Ningirsu
20 E-ninnU-ra ofEninnfi,
mu-na-gub he presented it.
ud-ba Du-du At that time Dudu
sanga (*»^''') Nin-gir-su-ka-kam was priest of Ningirsu.
This Dudu is mentioned again in D^c. ^"^^ No. 2 (comp.
Hilprecht's translation, O. B. I. p. 253, note i):
Du-du Dudu (= proper name: cp. Z. A.
xii. p. 344, 9),
sanga-ma^ high-priest
{dingir) JSfin-gir +ka + su of Ningirsu.
(diugir) JSfin-gir-su To Ningirsu
5 E-m'nnii-ra of Eninnfl,
Du-du Dudu,
sanga (*».f«>) Nin-gir-su-ka-ge priest of Ningirsu,
URU-\- inserted A ^-a-^'-ta from ?-a
mu-na-la-DUL-DU {Br. 9593; has brought this,
Hommel, S. L. 26i=diid-du{i))
10 GAG+ GIS'-ur (Br. and into a GA G-GIS {=masse
5491) -ku d'armes)-ur
mu-na-gim has made it.
C. T. part V, No. 12061, published also by Winckler, A.B. K.,
No. 4:
(dingir) JSfin-gir-su Unto Ningirsu,
gud ^ii»si'-) En-lil-ra the hero of Bel,
En-teme-na Entemena,
pa-k-si patesi
5 St'r-la-^'-pur of Shirpurla,
dumu En-an-na-tum the son of Enannatum,
' It is possible that the sign C^i/+ inserted A is the same as that in Galet A
of Eannatnm, iii. i'; = Gi^gal; comp. E. C. 361 and Br. 938.
= So Hilprecht and Thnreau-Dangin (E. C. ziS) = GAG+ GiS, Hommel,
S. L. 205, still = Ji^'isal.
ii8
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
pa-te-si
Sir-la-pur-^'-ka
(ga)lu AB-GI-GI-ka-ni
I o idingir) Nin-gir-su-ra{/)\ru-d\
dingir-a-ni
idingir) Dun+AN-^gur
patesi
of Shirpuria,
who the AB of his GI-GI
for Ningirsu has built ;
his god
is Dungur of heaven.
9. In Ddc. 31, No. 3, iii. 2, we read : {ga)lu AB-GI (dingir) Nin-gir-su-ka-
ru-a ; compare also Urukagina, Dec. 5, i. 1. 36, and see note to Dec. z'*'',
No. 3, iii. I. On account of the KA we ought to translate as was done above.
Ab
.. -ir probably too stands for AB-TR-ka.
10. Only parts oi RA visible. RU-A seems to have been left out.
12. See note to O. B. I. 115, ii. 6.
O. B. I. 115.
Col. I.
\En\-le-me-na
\_pa\-te-si
Sir-la-''' -pur
a sum-ma
(dingir) En-lil
ga-zi-kh-a
(dingir) Nin-har-sag-ka
Entemena,
patesi
of Shirpuria,
to whom power was given
by Bei,
who was nourished with the milk
of life
by Ninharsag,
Col. II.
.... da-a
a-ni idingir) En-lil-la
bur-mag
kur-ia mu-na-ia-en DUL-DU
(Br. 9593)
5 {dingir) Bun-gur
idingir) En-iemen ' (-aw)
his ? of BSl,
a great vase
from the mountain he brought
to Dungur,
the lord of the temen of heaven
' Hardly the beginning of the name Entemena, because this ruler never puts
' dingir ' before his name. Probably = en-temen-an = ' lord of the foundations of
heaven ' ; comp. also the name '■dingir) Dun-gur-AN. Hence (dingir) En-temen-
an, which we ought to read here, is in apposition to (dingir) Dun-^ur.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 1 19
O.B.I. 117.
Col. I.
[iid-^<iin£rtr) J ^hen . . .
\sag gayu 3600-/0: among 3,600 men
[su\-ni ha-ta-\iub-'y>a ' his power he had established,
ma^ nam-tar-ra a great fate (destruction)
5
Col. II.
mu-na-ni-sar ... [a tablet] ... he inscribed
nam-H-la-ni-ku .... [for] his life
O. B.I. 116.
Col. I.
{dingir) En-lil-li To Bgl
JEn-lil-^'-ia of Nippur, .
En-te-me-nif-ra by Entemena
mu-na-an-^ub ?\ it was presented.
Col. II.
na .
gi •
Only two of the inscriptions of Enannatum'' II., the son of
Entemena, have so far been published. The first in D^c. 6,
No. 4 = A. B. K. No. 3 ; see Jensen, K. B. iii'. p. 17 ; Hommel,
Geschichte, p. 295 ; and above, p. 13. The second in C. T.
23287. In the former he states that he built, or rather repaired,
the storehouse {E-KAS-^ GAR) for Ningirsu. The latter reads :
' See Thureau-Dangin, R. S. 189^, p. 172.
' For the meaning of this name, see under Entemena and Eannatum (p. 84).
Jensen's objection, K. B. iii'. p. I7i note 11, that if Enannatum would he = Bll-
iaml-ukSri, we should have the determinative ' god ' {dingir) before En, is
of no force, because in these eiarly texts we never find the determinative
■go4' before a proper name. This custom was first introduced by Shar-
ganisharSli. The expression (dingir) Nind-Ur is no exception. See under
Sharganisharali.
I20 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
C. T. 23287.
(Comp. G. Smith, Transactions of the Society of Biblical
Archaeology, i. 32 ; Records of the Past, second series, iii. 7.)
{dingir) Nin-gir-su Unto Ningirsu,
E-ninnu-ru of the Eninnfl,
En-an-na-ium Enannatum,
pa-te-si patesi
5 Sir-la-'^'-pur-ka of Shirpurla,
gan-a-ni his field
har ki-bad of a far off sanctuary
sukkal-U of (his) sukkallu,
nam-ti for the life
I o lugal-ni of his king,
En-an-na-tum + ku Jr ma viz. for Enannatum,
a-mu + ku + sub + na has presented it.
7. ki-bad (sic ; not Hh against Thiireau-Dangin, E. C. ii. note). See Br. 9659
and 1535 ; H. W. B. p. 470 : nisA entfernt,fern.
8. sukkal. Written LUd-li; comp. S*. 77 ; Br. 6170 ; H. W. B. p. 498 ;
and Lugalzag., note to i. 21.
12. .Ari7= verbal prefix; comp. Z. A. xii. p. 362 : muSa-as-ru-!'' ku (sic)-
gul, and see note to Cone of Entemena, iii. 31.
With Lummadur, the son of Enannatum II, we arrive at the
last representative of the house of Ur-NinS. Nothing but his name
is known to us. From the absence of the title patesi behind his
name we may conclude that Enannatum II. was the last patesi of
the line of Ur-Nina, and that the old enemies Kish and Gishban
have finally succeeded in overpowering Shirpurla.
It is hardly possible to look back upon this dynasty of Ur-Nini
— which, as we have seen, dates from before 4000 b. c. — without
being impressed by the high civilization, cult, the many buildings
and canals, military skill, and style of writing. Surely such a people
as this could not have sprung into existence as a deus ex machina ;
it must have had its history — a history which presupposes a de-
velopment of several centuries more. We would gladly follow
up the history of the successors of Lummadur, but the lack of
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 12I
material prevents us at present from so doing. Passing therefore
over an interval of about two hundred years in the history of
Shirpurla, we turn now to the enemies of the ' hero Ningirsu,' i. e.
KisH AND GisHBAN (or better Gishuh).
Kings of Eish and Gishban.
Various changes had befallen the land of Kish. When speaking
of Enshagkushanna, we saw that Kish was defeated. It had,
however, in course of time again increased in strength ^ Mesilim
was able to establish himself as ruler over Shirpurla at the time
of Lugalshuggur. His successors ''■ may have retained their glory
for a considerable period. They were, however, not able to
withstand the mighty weapons of Eannatum. This latter king
not only shook off the old yoke which Kish had fastened upon
Shirpurla, but even became 'king of Kish.' He must have re-
duced Kish to total impotence. Hence' it came about that Kish
was vanquished by another power, of which we shall hear shortly.
Just as Gishban, after its defeat by Eannatum, felt strong enough
to disregard the solemn promise never to invade the territory of
Shirpurla, so Kish, after its overthrow by Eannatum, seems to have
rapidly regained its old power. For we find a certain En-ne-UGVN,
' king of Kish,' who is also termed ' king of the hordes of Gishban,'
desirous with the help of this latter city to extend the power of
his capital. He was however defeated by a certain king of a
certain country (the names cannot be read on account of the mutilated
' This 'increasing in strength' began already under a certain U-dug-?
pa-te-si Kii, who presents something [sag-kab, comp. Br. 5655 ; Galet A, vii. 6)
to idin£ir) Za-[ma-md\. Comp. O. B. I. 108, and Hilprecht, ibid. p. 263,
note 2. This vase having been found in Nippur, we may suppose there-
fore that U-dug-? was not only in possession of Nippur, but also of
Shirpurla.
' Among whom may be classed a certain Lugal-da?-ak ? (R. A. iv. p. iii,
fig. 18) lugal Kti, whose inscription is to be found on a ' lance votive' with
a lion engraved on one of its sides, and which was disinterred ' au-dessus du sol
d'Our-Mna.^ Lugal-da ?-ak ? therefore lived before Ur-Nina, and may have
been one of the ancestors or successors of Mesilim, having like him sway
over Shirpurla.
122 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
condition of the tablets). 'His statue'— this unknown victorious
king records, while relating his victory over Un-ne-UG UN— 'his
shining silver, the utensils, his property, he carried away and
presented them to B61 at Nippur'.'
1 Hilprecht, when speaking of this En-m-UGUN (O. B. I. p. 264), thinks
that this ' king of Kish ' was defeated by a 'king of Kengi,' ' who lived shortly
before or after' Enshagkushanna. Both of these statements, however, are
without foundation, for —
(1) This inscription, as published by Hilprecht, does not give the slightest
trace {a) of the name of this victorious king, nor does it say (i) that he
was an ' EN Ki-en-gi-ki^ a lord of Kengi. Hilprecht's emendation of
line 4 (see O. B. I. p. 264, note 2) is simply imaginary.
(2) Above (p. II) we have seen that En-ne-UGUN must be placed either
at the same time or after Eannatum (comp. signs KA, KUR, and £).
But may we not assign this inscription to one of the rulers of Shirpurla?
The unknown king here reports that he took away ' alanbi^ ' his (i. e. En-
ne-UGUN s) statue.' Now we know from the Cone of Entemena that a stele
was erected (a) byMesilim, king of Kish (Cone, i. 12). Ush, patesi of Gishban,
removed this stHe (i. 18, 19). {b) Eannatum restored this stele of Mesilim
(ii. 8), apparently in a peaceful way (comp. i. 39 ff. — nothing is said of war),
and erected a new one on the canal from the great river to the Guedin (ii. 4, 5).
Urlumma, patesi of Gishban, casts the stHes of Eannatum into the fire (ii.
36, 37)-
Eannatum, no doubt, promptly punishes Urlumma (iii. 10). His victory,
however, is only indicated by these words : ' upon the dogs he poured out
terror; ' — it was therefore probably only a partial victory, or else Entemena would
have said that his father ' tu-ku bi-sig' (Galet A, iii. 23, 24) the Gishbanites.
The real victory of Gishban was reserved for Entemena ; he crushed
[e-gaz) the power of Urlumma (iii. 1 3 ff.) ; he even had strength enough to depose
Urlumma and make Hi, a priest of Innanna-ab-/'', take his place (iii. 34 ff.).
Of course, as might be expected, the Gishbanites were not satisfied with their
new patesi ; they tried to get rid of him. In order to do this they had to
invoke the help of a new power, viz. Kish. At this time there ruled in Kish
a ' king ' ; this king of Kish became thus also ' king of the hordes of Gishban*!.'
He went against Shirpurla, bat was defeated. By what king? If there was
a ' king ' of Kish at this time (Entemena), a considerable period must liave
elapsed since that of Eannatum (who himself defeated Kish and became its
king). And since Entemena mentions in his C6ne only the deposition of
Urlumma, it is most probable that ' Gisljban, together with Kish,' became hostile
at the end of Entemena's, or at the beginning of Enannatum II.'s reign. En-
ne-UGUN, therefore, lived at about this time, which also is in accordance
with the palaeographic evidence.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 123
The tablets which report this victory of a king of Shirpurla
{sic; see page 119) over En-ne-UGUN z.Tt published by Hilprecht
in O. B. I. Nos. 103, 104, 102, no, 105 — the text of which inscrip-
tion may be restored as follows (comp. O. B. I. p. 264, note 2, and
Winckler, A. F. v. p. 372) : —
(ENNE-UGUN.)
^(dingir) En-lil-la\ To Enlil,
\lugal-kur-kur-rci\ king of the lands,
[Entemena or Enannatum] (Enternena or Enanna-
tum II.)
\^pa-te-si ^jrpttrla-^'] (patesi of Shirpurla,)
5 gali> l + (ga)/u ... .J (O. B. I. king?
103)
ud {dingir) [Eft-Ii'I-lt'] When Enlil
e-na-ni-^un-a (O. B. I. 104, 3) had looked favourably upon
him,
Kis-l" then Kish
mu-^ul he infested ;
10 En-ne-Ugun Enne-Ugun,
gal-ir {ga)lu Kfs-k' king of Kish,
1. Bel of Nippur is here the chief god, and not Ningirsu, as we would
expect on account of Cone of Entemena, i. i ff. The division of the terri-
tory was made ' upon the righteous command of Bel.' The fight recorded
here resulted from the disobedience to Bel's command, therefore to him this
inscription is dedicated. See also 1. 24.
2, 3. Supplied according to note i on the preceding page. Hilprecht
read : X.X. en Ki-en-gi.
6. Whether the first sign in 1. 6 is the beginning of lugal is very doubtful.
It may also be E ; comp. 1. 7.
7. The first sign on 104, 3 seems to be SU, while on 103, 3 it is apparently
E. The second sign on 103, 3 is KI, but has to be read according to 104, 3,
NA. t^n, Br. 10503, «aM 'sa ini.
10. Ugun, Br. 8861 ; Z. A. i. p. 57 f.
124 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
mu-dur " he cast down.
[^a/+ ] {gd)lu erim ei^BAN-'''- The king of the hordes of Gishban,
ka-ge (O. B. I. 102, 2)
{lu)gal Kis-f^'-ge king of Kish,
1 5 uru-na ga-^ul his city teeming with malignity,
dig-ga his spoil
bil he burnt
(Two or more lines are wanting)
20 mu-ne-gl (O. B. I. no, 3) brought back
alan-hi his statue,
azag-zagin-M his shining silver,
gu dig-ga-bi the utensils, his spoil
(din^ir) En-lil-la to Enlil
25 \_E]n-Ul-^'-ku of Nippur
a-mu-na-sub he presented.
12. dur=KU, Br. 10542, nadA; K. B. iii'. p. 48, note **. According to
O. B.I. 105 follows upon this line instantly: alan-bi, hence 11. 13-20 are left
out there.
13. erim, Br. 8139, sdbu. gii-BAN = ligature. It seems however to be
highly probable that we have to read here, instead of erim gii-BAN-M, UD
+ .ff.i^A^'^!, i. e. simply Uff (^'i. 8124). Enne-Ugun then would be king of
Uh and king of Kish. So already Winckler, A. F. p. 373, note 2. For UH,
see iv. R^. 38, No. i, col. i. 12.
15. ga stands here for gan, Br. 4039, dufidu {daiddu). The same peculiarity
occurs again in O. B. I. 113, 8, ga-ti-la-ku, while in 1. ^ gan-ti-la-ku is written
= 'for abundance of; so also in O. B. I. 98, 6. Comp. also O. B. I. 112, 4
{ga-ti-la-ku), and ibid. 106, 3.
16. dig-ga. Comp. Enshagkushanna, O. B. I. 92.
17. . . . bil, Br. 4575 ; kaB, H. W. B. 585.
20. gl, Br. 6331 ; tdru ii', H. W. B. p. 702 c. This line is preceded in
O. B. I. no by . . . bil-a = \. 17 ; hence nothing left out.
21. T. C. 211. alan, Br. 7300.
22. azag, T. C. 260; kaspu. sagin, Br. 11773, ellu.
26. iub. Lugalzag. iii. 40.
In course of time, however — and probably not very long after
this defeat — Kish seems to have recovered from this blow.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 125
A certain Urzaguddu' must have been very successful in his
wars, for in addition to his title ' king of Kish,' he calls himself
also ' king of . . . '.' Unfortunately here again we have a gap,
so that we cannot determine of what city he had thus become
king.
Very little is known of the next king of Kish, Lugaltarsi. At
what time subsequent to Urzaguddu he lived, we cannot tell. So
much only is certain, that he reigned some time before Alusharshid,
about 3850 B.C. His inscription — the only one so far known to
us— is preserved in the British Museum (C. T. No. 12155)', in
which he records the building of BAD-KISAL in honour of
Bgl and Ishtar.
Before speaking of the next two kings of Kish, it would seem
' For this reading instead of Ur-Shulpaudda (Hilprecht), see Thureau-
Dangin, R. A. iv. p. 74, note 14, His inscription is published in O. B. I.
No. 93. Comp. ibid. p. 265, and Winckler, A. F. p. 373, 3. It reads :
\_dmgir En-Hl] To Enlil,
lugal kur-kur-ra king of the lands,
(diKgir) Nin-lil and to Ninlil,
nin-an-ki-ra the mistress of heaven and earth,
nun igi-'ie-ni-na who is greater than all its generations,
dam (dingir) En-lU-ra the wife of Enlil,
Ur-%ag-ud-du Urraguddu,
lugal-Kn-ki king of Kish,
lugal .... king of . .
^ The fact that he presents a vase with this inscription to Bel of Nippur
does not prove that Urzaguddu possessed Nippur (Hilprecht). See the C6ne
inscription of Entemena : The gods of Girsu and Gishban settle, upon ' the
righteous command of Enlil, king of the lands,' their boundaries. This does
not mean that Nippur was in possession of Shirpurla and Gishban. It is
surely a religious matter.
' See Thurean-Dangin, R. A. iv. p. 74, note 15. It reads : KDingir) Lugal-
kur-kur-ra \ {dingir) Innanna \ Nin (dingir) Innanna-ra \ Lugal-tar-si \ lugal
Kfs I bad-kisal \ mu-na-ru, i.e. according to Thureau-Dangin : 'En Vhon-
neur du dieu des contries, et de Ishtar, de la dame Ishtar (?? Translate ; the
mistress of the divine Innanna, and comp. p. 84, col. ii. 5), Lugal-tar-si, roi de
Kish, le mur de la terrasse (?) a construit.'
126 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
necessary here to remove an objection recently made by Hilprecht
(O. B. I. p. 270), who, foUowirig Winckler, believes that the expres-
sion lugal Kti is equal to lar Miali, i.e. king of the universe
{Kmig der Welt). By doing this Hilprecht becomes untrue to his
first pqsition, stated ibid. p. 23, where he firmly maintained that
LUGAL KIS did not mean anything else but 'king of Kish.'
That this latter position is the only true one is evident from
a comparison of the inscription of Mesilim quoted above, p. 1 6,
and the C6ne inscription of Entemena.
Mesilim, as we have seen, calls himself LUGAL KIS, while
Entemena terms him LUGAL KIS-'''. Hilprecht probably will
not question the identity of the Mesilim mentioned on the
' Masse d'armes aux lions' in Ddc. pi. i*«', fig. 2, with the
Mesilim mentioned by Entemena. If he does not, then LUGAL
KI& = LUGAL Kl^-i', and means 'king of Kish' (and not
' king of the world '). In connection with this we would like
to draw the attention of the reader to the fact that /Ae kings
of Kish call themselves only LUGAL KIS, without the deter-
minative KI (comp. inscriptions of Mesilim, Lugal-da ?-ak ?
Lugaltarsi, Manishtusu, Alusharshid, and O. B. I. 118);
while the other kings of Babylonia, when speaking of these
kings of Kish, always write KI$ with the determinative KI (comp.
inscriptions of Eannatum, passim, Entemena, Enne-Ugun, &c.).
One exception, however, seems to occur, viz. the king Urzaguddu,
apparently king of Kish, terms himself lugal Kih'''. This is but
an apparent exception. We have seen that Urzaguddu had also
another title : ' king of . . .' It seems therefore very probable,
notwithstanding the succession of the titles, viz. first 'king of
Kish,' and then 'king of . . .' (comp. what has been said
under Lugalkigubnidudu about the succession of titles), that
Urzaguddu was not originally 'king of Kish,' but 'king of . . .'
— a foreigner, who eventually ' became king of Kish', and not
vice versa.
This objection having been removed, we can now place
Manishtusu and Alusharshid also among the kings of Kish.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 127
Both flourished somewhere about 3850 b. c, i.e. before Sargon I.
(see above, p. 18)'-
When reading the inscriptiolis of these kings, if is as if a new
race were speaking to us, so widely different is the language used
by thesd r'ulers from that of their predecessors, or of any other
kings we have so far met with. We here find for the first time the
so-called Semitic-Babylonian inscriptions. It is the same language'
which is also employed in the inscriptions of Sharganisharali and
his successors, in that of Lasirab, king of Guti, and of Annubinini,
king of Lulubu, all of whom were more or less contemporary with
these kings of Kish. Scholars who believe that we must postulate
two different races among the inhabitants of Early Babylonia, call
the kings who wrote in this style, ' Semitic kings,' while the others
are referred to the ' Sumerian ' population. As a result of this they
read the names of these kings in a Semitic way. Manishtusu
becomes MA-AN-il-tu-irba ^ (so Winckler !), Urumush becomes
Alu-ularlid (i.e. ' He (some deity) founded the city,' see Br. 5032,
5068, and Hilprecht, O. B. I. p. 20, note i).
The inscription * of Manishtusu, whom we place provisionally
before Urumush, runs : ' Manishtuirba, king of Kish, has presented
(this) to Belit-Malkatu.'
Of more importance, from the historical point of view as well as
from the linguistic, is the next ruler, who probably followed soon
after the former. This ruler is Alusharshid. From his inscriptions
— to be found in sixtj'-one fragments of vases, which have been
excavated by the expedition of the University of Pennsylvania
under Dr. Peters, and partly published by Hilprecht" — we learn
' Thureau-Dangin places them after Naram-Sin (R. A. iv. p. 74 : ' pro-
bablement posUrieurs d. Naram-Sin ').
' See under Lugalzaggisi.
' The capitals indicate that the scholars do not know how to read the
syllables expressed thus in the Semitic language.
* Published in Mittheilungen des Akademisch-Orientalistischen Vereins zu
Berlin, i. 1887, p. 18; translated by Winckler, K. B. iii'. p. loi. Also pub-
lished in A. B. K. No. 67.
" O. B. I. Nos. 5-10, and pi. iii.-v. ; see also D&. pi. 5, 4 ; C. T. 12161 and
12162 ; O. B. I. 12, 13.
128
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
that he subdued Elam, on the eastern side of the Tigris, and the
country of Bara'se (Para'se), from which lands he brought back
these marble vases, and dedicated them to his gods at Nippur and
Sippara*. The longest of these vase-inscriptions, which make
known to us these significant historical facts, and thus indirectly
give a key for determining the boundaries of Kish, reads (O. B. I.
No. 5 ^ Comp. Hilprecht, ibid. p. 20) :
To
Bgl,
Alusharshid,
king
of Kish—
A-na
\ilu) Bel [EN-LIL]
Alu-ularlid [URU-MU-U^]
Kfs
\-mi\NI-NUY
Elamtu *-'''
ii
Ba-ra-a'-se-'''^
intra [SAG-GIS-RA-NIY
after
Elam
and
Bara'se
he had subjugated —
' For there Inscriptions of Alusharshid have also been found. It is interest-
ing to find that Sippara must have been in existence as early as this (3850 B.C.),
and its god must have enjoyed a wide influence.
^ O. B. I. No. 6 reads :
A-na
To
[dingir) En-lil
Bel
Alu-uiariid
Alusharshid,
sar
king
of Kish,
A-MU-SUB
presented it.
The shorter legends (see 0.
B. I. Nos.
7,8
; Dec
■ 5. 4) read;
Alu-uiariid
Alusharshid,
Ur
Kli
king
ofKish.
^ For inu written this way.
, comp.
H
. W.
B. p.
96. Here a conjunction
' at the time when.'
' Br. 9009.
' This line might also be read Ba-ra-aJi-se-ki; o' and a}} in Old Babylonian
writing fall together. See also S". col. i. 7 fr.,and A. B. K. 16, 15.
' sag-gii-ra, Br. 3606; nlru, H. W. B. 439. Pract. either intr or oftener in&r.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 129
IN NAM-RA-A G ' the IN of the prince
Elamti-^' of Elam
iddin\A-MU-^UEY he presented.
For but a short period subsequent to Alusharshid does Kish seem
to have enjoyed its old power. The might of Kish gave place to
that of Agade, as we shall see shortly (comp. also p. 18). Leaving
therefore Kish " for the present, we turn our attention to the other
enemy of Old Shirpurla, viz. Gishban.
At about 4000 B.C.*, not long after the time of Eannatum,
Gishban seems to have acquired new power and might. It directed
' Purely Sumerian {sic, Hilprecht, O. B. I. 264, note i), from nam + ri + ag
(v. R. 20, i3f) = Assyr. shallaiu shaldlU, Del. Assyr. Gram. § 73, 132. Comp.
also O. B. I. p. 20, note €. Na-ra-ag occurs also in Gudea B, vi. 66, and Vase
of Naram-Sin, 1. R. 3, No. 7, and in R. A. v. No. I. p. 30, fig. 25. Scheil, who
recently published some texts, showed that NAM-RA-AG must be a name of
some kind of an officer. As such it is parallel to IP- US (cp. Z. A. xii. 267 :
Gimil-BH IP-U§-GAL ; E-ir-BH IP-US lugal. On 368 ibid, nam-ra-ag
is parallel to GIR ( = officer). He then translates the passages where this
nam-ra-ag is found, as follows : — Gudea B, vi. 66 : ' il frappa Ansam et
amena son prince dans k temple de Ningirsu '; Vase of Narara-Sin (i. R. 3,
No. "i): ' A Naram-Sin, roi de/ quatre rigiotis, vase du prince de Magan '; and
our passage here : ' A Bel, aprh la conquHe d'Elam, il consacra {pu voua) le
IN du prince d'Elam. This may also help us to understand what //V means.
/W^has been translated by 'of or 'in' (Hilprecht, Winckler). As such it
would be a shortened form for ina. IN here may be just as well something
which the prince has ; in O. B. I. i. 1 1 EN-LI L is called the IN of EN-LIL-k',
hence we may think of a ' guard ' or ' guardian(s) ' of a king or city. Enlil is
the ' guardian ' of Nippur ; in O. B. I. 5 the ' guards ' of the prince of Elam are
presented to B61. Comp. also S*". 2, 5 in Hommel, S. L. p. 74 : in=pi-il-lum
{Herr ?) ; in =pi-il-tum {Herrin T) Hommel apparently was on the right,
track. See also note to O. B. I. i. 1. lo.
' Lugalzag. iii. 40.
' To one of the rulers of Kish belongs also the inscription published in
O. B. I. 118, which reads :
N. N. Name X.X.
iarru king
Kts of Kish,
a-na to
('V») BH \}4ingir) En-lH\ Bai
\_a-'\mu\4ub'\ = iddin has dedicated it.
* For this date, see the Chronological Table.
K
130 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
its chief attention not so much towards Shirpurla as towards the
south. Probably the rulers of Shirpurla had at this time been
reduced to utter weakness by its old enemies (i. e. Kish and Gishban),
of which enemies Gishban was destined to play the most important
role in the development of ancient Babylonian history.
Lugalzaggisi, the son of Ukush, patesi of Gishban, we find at the
head of the armies of Gishban, which he leads victoriously against
the south. After Erech had opened its doors, the whole of
Babylonia to the Persian Gulf fell an easy prey to the conquering
hero. He, although originally only the son of a patesi, becomes
king of Erech, nay, even king of the ' whole world.' ' Enlil, king
of the lands, has given to Lugalzaggisi the kingship of the world ;
he has made him to prosper before the world ; he it was that had
placed the lands under his sceptre — the lands " from the rising of the
sun even unto the going down of the same." He it also was that
gave him the tribute of those lands, which he made to dwell in
peace, notwithstanding that they had been brought under a new
regime.' With these words Lugalzaggisi acknowledges, as the
kings of Shirpurla did, that Enlil, and Enlil alone, had granted to
him so unprecedented a dominion, extending from the lower sea
of the Tigris and the Euphrates (i. e. the Persian Gulf) to the upper
sea (i.e. the Mediterranean). Constituted thus ' lord of the world,'
he now becomes its summus episcopus. ' In the sanctuaries of Kengi,
as patesi of the lands, and in Erech, as high priest, they (the gods)
established him.' To quote Hilprecht (p. 267): ' Babylonia, as
a whole, had no fault to find with this new and powerful regime.
The Sumerian civilization was directed into new channels from
stagnation ; the ancient cults between the lower Tigris and Euphrates
began to revive, and its temples to shine in new splendour.' Thus
endowed with the highest temporal and spiritual power, he ' makes
Erech to abound in rejoicing.' Nor does he forget the other repre-
sentative cities of his domain : ' Ur, like a steer, to the top of the
heavens he raised.' ' Over Larsa, the beloved city of Shamash, he
poured out waters of joy.' His own native town and land receive
chief attention : ' Gishban, the beloved city of . . . , to an unheard-of
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 131
power he raised.' He, as wise ruler and statesman, not only shows
his good will and favour towards the larger and more influential
cities, but also protects the weaker ones : ' Ki-Innanna-ab ' (see
C6ne of Entemena, iii. 29) ' he kept in an enclosure, like a sheep
that is to be shorn ^'
Indeed, ' Lugalzaggisi stands out from the dawn (?) of Babylonian
history as a giant who deserves our full admiration for the work he
accomplished ' (Hilprecht, O. B. I. p. 268).
The inscription recording these most important events is pub-
lished by Hilprecht in O. B. I. No. 87 ; it has 132 lines of text,
which were restored by that scholar from 88 fragments of 64
different vases under the most trying circumstances, — indeed
a masterpiece of that scholar's skill and learning. The inscription
may conveniently be divided as follows : —
(i) Enlil, king of the lands, endows Lugalzaggisi (here follow his
titles) {a) with the kingship over the world ; (3) makes the
lands to be satisfied with this new reign ; {c) makes the king
also the spiritual head of the newly acquired kingdom ;
i-ii. 25.
(2) Lugalzaggisi shows his thankfulness, skill, and wisdom by
his care for various cities of his realm; ii. 26-iii. 2.
(3) But he does not forget the god from whom he has received
all that he is and has; iii. 3-12.
(4) He concludes with a prayer to Enlil, to whom this inscription
is dedicated.
The whole reads as follows : —
LUGALZAGGISL
O. B. L No. 87 ''-
Col. I.
{dmsrir) En-lil Enlil (B61),
lugal kur-kur-ra king of the lands,
' This is probably the meaning of th? passage in ii. 43 ff.
^ A partial translation, O. B. I. p. 266 ff. Thureau-Dangin first gave a com-
plete translation in R. S. 1897, p. 263 ff.
K 2
132
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
15
Lugal-zag-gi-si
lugal Unug-^'-ga
lugal kalam-ma
{iib An-na
{ga)lu-ma^
(dingir) JSlidaha
dumu U-kul
pa-te-si ei'^-BA iV-*'
{ga)lu-ma^
{dingir) JSfidoba
igi-zi-lar-ra
{dingir) Lugal-kur-kuT-ka
pa-te-si gal
{dingir) En-lil
gii-^pt)-tug sum-ma
{dingir) EN-KI
mu-pad-da
{dingir) JJfj^
to Lugalzaggisi,
king of Erech,
king of the world,
priest of Anu,
hero
of Nidaba,
son of Ukush,
patesi of Gishban,
hero
of Nidaba,
(to him) who was favourably-
looked upon by the faithful eye
of Lugalkurkura,
the great patesi
of Enlil (BSl),
to whom intelligence was given
by Enki (Ea),
who was chosen (called)
by Utu (Shamash),
I. 6. iiib, Br. 10352.
9, kus, Br. 6018.
10. Text restored according to ii. 38.
13. igi . . . bar, Br. 9297; H. W. B. p. 528: naplusu. igi-zi=the true
faithful eye, opposed to /«/ { — i^-ur (nakru) ), the evil eye.
17. gii{-pi)-tug and the variant gii-tug{^pi). A phrase which occurs very
often among the titles of the patesis of Shirpurla ; comp. also Gudea B, col. ix.
24, and see Jensen, K. B. iii'. p. 48, note 2, who calls it ' Ideogramm fiir
"Ohr."' In Galet A of Eannatum, ii. 6, we have gii-iug{-pi); so also in
V. R. 61, col. iv. 13 : ana rdmdnika u-zu-an-ka igti-iug(-pi)) , the syllable fug
being always vrritten with X17. Comp. also the C6ne of Entemena, col. v. 24.
Hommel, S. L. No. 288, on the other hand, takes gii-tug {KIT) as a phonetic
writing for gis-tug (Br. 5727), and the /V as determinative. See also Br. 7978,
Pl-tug; Br. 5727, gii-tug, hoth=hmii ; and Br. 5721, gfs-tUg {KU) {-pi) =
K0KK ■= understanding, intelligence, H. W. B. p. 37. Comp. also gii-tug{-pi)-
ni in P. S. B. A. Nov. 1890, p. 63 (where it no doubt stands for Assyr.
migiri-tti), with v^R. 19, 24 a : gii-tug ia magdri, i. e. to hear in the sense of
' to obey.'
19. fad, Br. 9422, zakdru, nahA, tatftA, mu may he^iumu.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 133
lu^-ma^ sublime minister
{dingir) En-zu of Enzu (Sin),
ne-nita^ the shakkanakku
(dingir) l/lu of UtU,
25 u-a i^''"£:''') Innanna the fosterer of Innanna (Ishtar),
dumu tu-da a son brought up
(dingir) JSfidaba by Nidaba,
ga-zi-ku^a who was nourished with the milk
of life
(dingir) Nin-har-sog by Ninljarsag,
30 {ga)lu (dingir) UMV {&ID f) servant of Umu (Shid ?), priest(ess)
sanga Unug-^'-ga of Erech,
sag egt-a a slave brought up
(dingir) Niit-a-gid-^a-du by Ninagidgadu,
nin Unug-^'-ga-ka mistress of Erech,
iti-ma^ the great abarakku
21. lug, Br. 6170, sukkallu. Comp. Hilprecht, O. B. I. p. 255, note 6:
sukkallu = a servant (gal) who pours out (su) [namely, water over his master's
hands and feet] ! But see Delitzsch, E. S. p. 98 if.
23. ne-nitag, T. C. 203 + 74. In Gudea B, iv. 13, we- have the signs T. C.
203+7- Jensen, K. B. iii'. p. 30, note 7, transcribes ne-ura and translates
'Landvogt'; comp. also ibid., Kosmol. p. 477. If we are to see in ne-nitag
the ideogram for 'iakkanakku (generally written T. C. 203 + 8, Br. 9195), we
have to suppose that T. C. 74, 7> 8, originally formed one sign. Comp, also
Thureau-Dangin, R. S. 1897, p. 270, note i ; Hilprecht, O. B. I. p. 266j note 4.
The former reads kii-nitag; the latter ne-gii. See also notes to E. C. 26, and
1. 8 of O. B. I. 20.
25. u-a, Br. 6095 ; z&ninu, H. W. B. p. 258.
26. dumu tu-da. Comp. Inscription of Gudea, passim, tu, Br. 1070,
al&du.
28. ga, Br. 6114, 'iiabu + zi {napiiiii) + kit, Br. 882, akdlu, and 884, 'iu^nunu,
H. W. B. p. 258 —nourished with the milk of life.
30. (dingir) UMU, T. C. 69 J Br. 3896. In iv. R. 35", No. 2, 1. i, this
sign occurs again in the name Sid-lftm-fa-ud-du ; comp. Winckler, K, B. iii'.
p. 82, No. 8. Should we read with Thureau-Dangin here Sid too, and comp<
Br. 5974 = god Mardukt Comp. also Hommel, Geschichte, p. 336 f, on the
introduction of Shidlamtauddu into Shirpurla.
31. egi, Br. 6611 ; likHtu, H W. B. p. 385.
34. iti, Br. 9427, abarakku. See Galet A, ii, 10 ; Gud^a P, i. 13.
134
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
36 dingir-ri-ne-ra
ud di'tS'*-) En-lil
lugal kur-kur-ra-ge
Lugal-zag-gi-si
nam-lugal
40 kalam-via
e-na-sum-ma-a
igi kalam-ma-ge
si-e-na-di-a
hur-kur ne-na
45 e-ni-sig-ga-a
titu ud-du-ta
■utu sii-ku
gu-e-na-gar-ra-a
ud-ba
a-ab-ba
sig-ga (sic)-/«
of the gods —
when Enlil,
king of the lands,
to Lugalzaggisi
the kingship
of the world
had given,
when he before the world
had made him to prosper,
when the lands under his power
(rule)
he had given,
(and) from the rising of the sun
Col. II.
to the going down of the sun
he had subdued (them, i. e. the
lands),
then (at that time)
from the sea
the lower
41. The first sign is not, as Hilprecht thinks = Br. 5410, nih,ga,\m!!. = Br. 5839, t.
Comp. above, p. 10; so also Thureau-Dangin in R. S. 1897, p. 68, note i.
This e when occurring in verb-forms stands always before «". Comp. besides
this line: col. i. 43, si-ena-di-a, and ii. 11; i. 45, e-ni-sig-ga-a; ii. 2,gu-e-
na-gar-ra ; iii. 11, e-na-sirra ; 1 2, e-na-de.
42. igi, Br. 9365, ma^r.
43. si . . . di, Br. 3461-63 ; H. W. B. p. 310, iidru, suleluru.
44. n£ = emAku, Br. 9184.
46. utu ud-du^sttiamU, Br. 7886.
II. I. utu "sit, Br. 7954, eribu ia ianiii. Here the St/ is Br. 8644 ; it ought
to be Br. 10822. Both signs, however, change repeatedly.
2. gu . . . gar, Br. 3318, kadddu, H. W. B. p. 580 and Br. 3319, kanMu ia
amHi, H. W. B. p. 340.
3. tid-ba = ina Amiiuma, or ina Umi iuati (Br. 113).
4. a-ab-ba, Br, 11474, t&mtu,
5- sig-ga-ta. So should be read. The first ta undoubtedly is a mistake of
the scribe. «;?-, T. C. 259. sig-ga, Br, iiS'ji,'sapHi,iaj!l(lu,
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
135
IS
20
6. T,
7. Br,
Idigna
Buranunu-bi
a-ab-ba
igi-nim-ma-ku
gir-bi
si-e-na-di
uiu ud-du-ta
uiu Ik-ku
{dingir) En-lil'li
\lag/]-gar
[su-ntf^ mu-ni-iug
kur-kur u-sal-la
mu-da-nb.
kalam-e
a ^ul-la mu-da-e
of the Tigris
and the. Euphrates
to the sea
the upper
his path
he straightened.
From the rising of the sun
to the going down of the sun,
Enlil,
the making of gifts
caused his hands to have,
the lands in peace
he caused to dwell (rest),
the world
with a water of jo)' he watered.
.C. 83; Br. 11650.
1 1663; ^j=- copula, Br. 5 131.
9. igi-nim (T. C. 157), Br. 9375, elitiit 11. 4-9: ttltu i&mti sapltti ana
tAmti eltti. The phrase occurs again in Gudea B, v. 25-27.
10. gir = padanu, tallaktti, Br. 9191 and 9207. P'or bi in gir-bi, see
Thureau-Dangin : ' Dans f expression gir-bi, bi ne pent ifaucune fafon repri-
senter h pronom possessif en rapport avec une personne: ilfaut done traduire
" ce chemin"' ou " leur chemin," c.-&d. le chemin du Tigre et de V Euphrate'
So also in Gudea B, v. 25-27. Hilprecht translates: he straightened his
path, O. B. I. p. 267. So correctly.
15. Only the second half of the first sign visible. The variant gives a sign
which looks something like that in col. i. ■^o = SID ; comp. then Br. 5970 =
lag—kurbannu ; read lag-gar, which would be : the making {gar") of gifts {lag),
16. Part of AT' still visible. Probably we have to add, with Thureau-Dangin,
SU before ni, and read : 'iu-ni mu-ni-tug. tug, H. W. B. 310 = «M, to have.
Translate: the making of gifts (= revenues) he (Enlil) caused his (Lugal-
raggisi's) lands to have = he allowed Lugalzaggisi to receive revenues. Thureau-
Dangin: 'Us revenus (?) lui accorda' Hilprecht: and granted him dominion
over everything (!).
17. u-sal-la, Br. 6086; aburrii, H. W. B. p. 10.
18. nd., T. C. 261, Br. 8997 ; rabdsu, H. W. B. p. 610.
20. a ^ul-la. The a may be either = mil, water ; or it may be a meaningless (?)
prefix to form nouns, gul, Br. 10884 ; baM, iidMu, H. W. B. p. 270. Thus
we would get either ' water of joy ' or ' joy.'
mu-da-e ; e,'&x.i'iJ^\ = in-&; here with »;«-(/« = verb = watered. 11. 19 and 20
136 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
bar-bar Ki-en-gi In the sanctuaries of Kengi, .
pa-te-si kur-kur-ra as patesi of the lands,
ki Unug-'^'-gi and in Erech,
i^ib nam-nun-ku as high-priest,
25 mu-na-gar-e-ne they established him.
ud-ba At that time
Unug-^'-gi Erech
ka (sic) -zal-a in pleasures (joy)
ud-mu-da-zal-zal-li he made to abound.
30 Uru-unug-'''-e Ur,
gud-gim sag-an-ku like a steer, to the top of the
heaven
mu-ru-gur he raised,
'Ud-unug-''' Larsa,
uru ki-ag the beloved city
may be translated either : the lands with a water of joy he watered (Thureau-
Dangin), or (over) the lands he poured out {mu-da-e) joy. Hilprecht, who
thinks th.a.te=gh {='iakdnu), seems to take these two lines in the sense of:
the lands he made joyful. See O. B. I. p. 267, note 4. See also especially
1.36.
2r. bar, Br. 6?i';S, parakku.
24. nam-nun, Br. 2143, rubAtu.
25. The third sign is probably that of GAR, which hangs here on the
separating line.
28. The text has for the first sign sag; it ought to be ka, as the variant
gives it. ka-zal-a, Br. 668, taiiltu, pleasure.
29. zal-zal, Br. 5358 ; bar4, H. W. B. 184. ud . . . zal-zal,'Rt. 7909, uitabri.
31. gim = Mnui ; sag-an-ku = ana rli 'iaml; cp. iii. I.
32. mu-ru-gur. The second sign is not that of T. C. 68 = «r«J, 'bronze'
(Thnreau-Dangin), nor that for UM, T. C. 69 (Hilprecht), but that which
occurs again in 1. 34, uru-ki-ag. That the sign URU may also have the
value of RU, see Barrel-Cyl. of Urukagina, col. ii. 10. In verb-forms of
our inscription this URU^RU stands, especially in such cases where it is
preceded by MU; comp. ii. 42 ; iii. 2, 26, 28. Is this URU=RU a dialec-
tical variant for RA 1 Comp. also Galet A of Eannatum, col. iv. 24, and
vi. 7, 9, in which places we find the expression sag-e-ru-sig; and Gudea B, ix. 5 :
ge-URU{ie&d JSR, on account of the /«, and not UM ox IM)-kur-ne, For
gur, see 1. 42.
34. ki-ag, Br. 4745, rAmu.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
137
35 ('^'•»^>) U/u-ge
a-ne ^ul-la
mu-da-e
gi^-BAN-^'
uru ki-ag
40 (ding-ir) f.gg
h-ma^
mu-ru-gur
Ki'Innanna-ab-^'-e
ganam. sig gur-a-gim
45 % mu-da-gi-gt
Ki-an-^'-ge
gu-an-ku
of Utu,
with waters of joy
he watered.
Gishban,
the beloved city
of . . .,
to a power very high
he raised.
Ki-Innanna-ah,
like a sheep whose wool should
be shorn,
he kept in an enclosure.
Of Kian
Col. III.
the ' head ' to the heaven
36, a-ne gttl-la. This expression undoubtedly favours tlie translation of
Thnrean-Dangin given above in 1. 20. a-ne — a-e-ne =flur.
40. Comp. Cone of Entemena, col. i. 6. The second sign has not yet been
identified.
42. gur, T. C. 103 ; Br. 6148, ndiA; andfiisi, "iaM.
43. Thureau-Dangin reads Ki-Nin-ab-ki-e, and refers to R. A. iv. No. I,
p. 23. Comp. also C8ne of Entemena, iii. 28 ff.
44. The first sign either = Br. 10242, ^a>-««, or Br. 10256, ganam. The
second sign is Br. 10781, hpdtu. Both these signs occur very often in the
E. A. H. texts. Thureau-Dangin remarks to the latter sign : ' Cest exacie-
ment Timage d'un mitier h. tisser.' The third sign is composed out of UR U,
'city,' with inserted GU, T. C. 172. The whole sign therefore is = Br. 931 :
kasdmu, H. W. B. 344, or kasdsu, H. W. B. 590, or masdru, H. W. B. 422,
which all mean ' to cut, cut off.' GU, according to Thureau-Dangin, R. S.
1897, p. 272, note 8, ' se compose de NI et HAL: ceci risulte clairement de
la forme que ce signe prisente dans les inscriptions d'Our-Nina {cf. le nom d%
plre de ce roi, Gu-ni-du, jusqtiici faussement lu Ni-^al-ni-dii).'
■ 45. For ieg, comp. Z. A. ii. 211 = Br. 11193; lipittu, H. W. B. 383:
Umschliessung, Vmhegung. See also D^c. z, ii. 2.
gi-^, Br. 6336 ; pakdda, H. W. B. 534. Thureau-Dangin translates :
' Ninab comme une brebis dont on tond la laine (?) dans une enceinte il
enferma'
III. I. gu, Br. 3215 and 3223, kiiddu, rt'su ; gu-an-iu : comp. ii. 31, sag-an-
138
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
15
mu-ru-gi
Lugal-zag-\gi-s{\
lugal Unug-\_^'-ga\
lugal kalam-ma
kin-kin-ma
{dingir) JEn-lil
lugal \kur-kur-ra\
En-lil-\^-a\
sukum ('^'"irir) Innanna
e-na-gid-\da\
a-dug e-na-d[f\
&U-TUR
[dingir) En-Hl
lugal kur-kur-ra-ge
he turned.
Lugalzaggisi,
king of Erech,
king of the world,
took care
of Enlil,
king of the lands
the Nippurian ;
sacrifices to Innanna
he offered,
and with good water he watered
(them, i. e. the sacrifices).
Prayer :
' Enlil,
king of the lands,
"iu. Both expressions seem to be the same. The ge in ii. 46, however, shows
that gu refers to Kian, which two lines therefore ought to be translated as
above.
6. kin, T. C. 294, Br. 10753; iipru, H. W. B. 683. kin kin may be better
taken as a verb: Br. 10754, 'sitiu, H. W. B. 632 : ' etwas sick angelegen sein
lassen, Sorge fiir etwas tragen, auf etwas bedaeht sein.' Translate : L. . . .
took care of Enlil, and offered up sacrifices for Innanna. The ma contains the
overhanging vowel ; we ought therefore read probably : gim-gim-ma.
10. The first sign = T. C, 248, Br. 9928; kurummatu, H. W. B. 354.
11. gid, Br. 7514; gasdsu, H. W. B. 590, Br. 7520; katdbu, H. W. B. 599.
Both verbs mean ' to cut.' Comp. with this Shalmanassar, Black Obel. 1. 84 ;
' kt}dti ana il&ni roMti ak-iis ; lit. I cut presents, i. e. I offered (brought)
presents.
12. Second sign, T. C. 190, dug- t&bu. The last sign is probably DE : only
the beginning is visible. T. C. 117, Br. 6730 ; iakA ia ikli, H. W. B. pp. 685
and 479 : ntM.
13. SU-TUR occurs again in Gudea E, ix. 12. Jensen translates there:
' zersliickeln,' and explains in a note, ' ttir=klein, 'iu-tur—klein machm^ see
K, B. iii^. p. 48, note ff. Thureau-Dangin translates ' priire^ and adds : ' le
sens de "jfiriire" "invocation," " d^dicace," est rendu assez probable parnotre
passage' He is right In both passages, i. e. in Gndea and here, the verbs
follow always with one of the precative particles prefixed {ga-, /«-, /«), except
in 1.43; see below. See also Hommel's explanation of SU'nin-TUR-la-bi
in S. L. p. 109.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 139
dtngt'r a ki-ag-mu (sic) the god my beloved father,
nam-?-mu my . . .
^e-na-bi may he decree ;
nam-ti-viu to my life
20 nam-ti life
^a-ba-ta^-^i may he add ;
kur u-sal-la the land in peace
^a-mu-da-nd, may he make to rest ;
nam-{ga)lu-kal the soldiery,
25 u-rig-gim like flowers (grass),
su-dagal ^a-mu-ru-dug with loving hands may he establish
it;
zag an-na-ge of the heavenly folds (= sanctuaries)
si-'ga-mu-ru-di may he take care.
kalam-e Upon the world
16. a, Br. 11334, abu. For ni read /«a, on account of the mu in 11. 17
and 19, and ihe^e-men in 1. 36.
17. The second sign has not yet been identified. It also occurs in some of
the dates of the E. A. H. collection (Nos. 108, 109), where it has been trans-
lated by ' cult.' See Ur IV., uncertain dates, 4.
. 18. a, Br. 5124; kiM, H. W. B. 577 ; iam^, H. W. B. 708.
19. nam-ti or nam-H-la, Br. 2133, baldtu.
31. tag, Hommel, Sum. Les. No. 151 ; Br. 4535, esijiu; H. W. B. 308.
22. Comp, ii. 17.
23. Comp. ii. 18.
24. nam-{ga)lu-kal. See C6ne of Entemena, col. iii. 22. The variant for *a/
gives ra, comp. i. 35 ; ought we to translate, therefore, ' The fate (Hfitfu) for
the people may he establish with loving hands like flowers ' ?
25. u-rig, Semitism ! Br. 6053, urikitu, urhttu ; R. A. iv. 74, 2 ; H. W. B.
P- 243-
26. 'iu-dagal. Partly mutilated. aTa/a/, Br. 5454, /-<{»/«= with loving hands.
dug, Br. 533; kunnu, H. W. B. 321. Translate: the soldiery, like herbs
(plants), with loving hands may he establish it.
27. zag, T. C. 101 ; Br. 6475, eirtti. zag-an, Br. 6499 (usttg) = esrlti. The
ge shows that an-na = 'iamA, '-Sanctuaries of heaven' = ' heavenly sanctuaries.'
E. C. 414 identi6es ZAG with Br. 5558 : ama'i=suburu ' Hiirde!
28. «... di, Br. 3461 ; tMru= iii^ H. W. B. 310.
ag. kalam. This sign is here separated into two. On account of which,
Hilprecht thinks that this sign is composed of e (canal) +gi (reed), and thus
140 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
30 ki-sag-ga mercifully
igi-'ga-mu-da-gab may he lift up his eye ;
nam-sag-ga mercy,
mu-tar-ri-KU-a which he has ordained,
su-na mu-da-ni-ii-e-ne into their hands (may)
they {e-ne) receive it,
35 sib sag-gud-gal (I), the shepherd having the head
of a steer,
da-er ^e-men may I be for ever.'
nam-ti-la-ni'ku For his life
{.dingir) En-lil to Enlil,
lugal ki-ag-ni his beloved king,
40 a-mu-na-iuh he has consecrated it.
denotes ' a piece of land intersected by canals and covered with reeds ' (O. B. I.
p. 252, note 9). But see for the present Delitzsch, E. S. p. 142 ff., who takes
tlie very same signs to mean (being composed of three parts) : 'grosses Gefuge
von Leuten.'
30. sag, T. C. 27S; Br. 7291, damku.
31. igi . . .gab, Br. 9327, ndsA "ia ltd.
33. tar, Br. 381, Mniu, ' to ordain, decree.' In the original we have the
signs thus : mu-tar-ri-ku-a. Probably we ought to read mu-ku-tar-ri'U. ku
then would be verbal prefix; comp. Cone of Entemena, iii. 21. Or have we to
suppose with Thnreau-Dangin, R. S. 1897, p. 274, note 2, that KU is here
'posifixe verbal' ? But see note to C. T. 23287, 1. 12. The a ' est Vindice de
la relativity.'
34. ti, Br. 1 700, lakH. Optative particle left out, which we would expect here.
35. sib sag-gud, and not sib-sag-ta (Thureau-Dangin). TA is not written
thus; comp. i. 46; ii. 5, et passim, ghl, Br. 2238, bdi& ; lit. a shepherd {siS)
having {gctt) the head {sa^ of an ox (.gud) = ' the ox-headed shepherd,'
a synonym of a king according to Jensen, O. B. I. p. 252, note 4. Thureau-
Dangin : ' le pasteur qui se tient i la tlte.'
36. da-er, Semitism ! Br. 6660, ddrii, H. W. B. 213. men, Br. 10358,
anaku. ge-men = lA anaku. Hilprecht, p. 269, note 3, translates da-ur ge-me
by = ' he may pronounce (speak) for ever.'
40. iub, Br. 1435, 1434, naddnu, nadA, i. e. to dedicate (comp. FTIJ! m3
' gift,' Ezek. xvi. 33); Z. A. ii. 296; K. B. iii'. p. 26, note*"; Transactions
of the Society of Biblical Archaeology, viii. 350 ; R, A. ii. p. 62 ; Tallquist,
Babylonische Schenktmgsbriefe, p. 9. 'ifiot = ' ersehen^ as Hommel, Gesch.
p. 302, translates; see O. B. I. p. 21, note i.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 141
In connection with this text of Lugalzaggisi, Hilprecht, in O. B. I.
pp. 266-268, discusses the following important questions : —
(i) The time of Lugalzaggisi.
(2) His nationality.
(3) The situation and identification of Gis-£AN-^'.
(4) The meaning of lugal-halam-ma and nam-lugal-kalam-e
respectively.
As regards the question of time, we have seen (p. 11 ff.) that
Lugalzaggisi is not by any means as early as Hilprecht supposes
him to be. On the contrary, instead of antedating Eannatum, he
rather followed him.
With regard to the situation of Gishban, and its identification (i. e.
that Gishban is not Harran, as Hilprecht believes), we have heard,
when discussing the Cone inscriiytion of Entemena, that Gishban
must be sought in the immediate neighbourhood of Shirpurla-Girsu,
it being its northern neighbour, and that its territory extended from
the Euphrates (or thereabouts) to the east of the Shatt-el-JJai ;
that the correct reading of its name probably is Gishulj, and that it
has to be identified with the modern Djokha.
Leaving the fourth point for the present (see Naram-Sin), we
proceed to consider the question of the nationality of Lugalzaggisi
and his predecessors in the rule of Babylonia. With this is bound
up the Sumerian question. Must we assume in Ancient Babylonia
two nations, each with its own proper dialect, or was there but one
people. Using two different modes of writing ?
Scholars of great eminence are arrayed on either side.
Among those who maintain that there is only one nation, the
Semitic, may be noted especially Hal^vy and Thureau-Dangin.
Scholars who hold that the ' Sumerians ' formed the original popula-
tion of Babylonia are, among others, Sayce, Hilprecht, Hommel,
Haupt, Jensen, Lehmann, Delitzsch (Schriftsystem), and Weissbach.
According to these authorities, the Sumerians invented the system of
cuneiform writing, and had their own (agglutinative) language and
grammar ; later on, when the barbarians, called Semites, invaded
142 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
the country, they adopted the system of writing invented by the
Sumerians, to express by its help their own language.
Let us hear two scholars who may fairly be cited as representa-
tives of these opposing views.
Hilprecht argues that Lugalzaggisi, although his inscription is
written in Sumerian, is notwithstanding a Semite. He adduces
three arguments for this view : —
(i) The Sumerian name Lugalzaggisi was probably adopted by
him when he ascended the throne of Erech and of the
'kingdom of the world.' Lugalzaggisi', meaning: 'the
king is filled with unchangeable power' (O. B. I. p. 265,
note 4), must be read in Semitic something like Sharru-
mdli-emUki-Mni, O. B. I. p. 269 and note i).
(2) The phrases ' from the lower sea of the Tigris and Euphrates
to the upper sea,' 'from the rising of the sun to the
setting of the sun,' and others remind us forcibly of the
phraseology of the latest Assyrian monarchs. Ibid. p. 269,
note 2.
{3) His use of the ideogram da-er (col. iii. 36) is doubtless of
Semitic origin = ddril, ' eternal.'
I . As we are concerned here with texts and inscriptions pre-
ceding the time of Sharganishardli, Naram-Sin, Alusharshid, and
others — who are acknowledged on both sides to be Semitic rulers,
and their inscriptions accordingly Semitic — it is necessary to
adduce arguments taken from inscriptions of those kings who are
disputed as to their nationality, i.e. of the kings who preceded
Lugalzaggisi.
The predecessors of Lugalzaggisi bear good Semitic names : —
Mesilim, king of Kish, may be read : Parse-tHallim, ' he keepeth
the commands.'
Lugalshuggur = iar-kur{um)mat4am^, ' the king is food of
heaven.'
'■ This name also occurs at the time of Ur IV. ; see C. T, 94-10-16, 10,
rev. iii : I'A Luga!-zag-gi-si pa-al {sabrit) ; C. T. 95-10-12, 20, obv. i : Lugal-
sag-gi-si engar.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 143
In connection with this name, we may invite attention to a
remarkable argument of Hilprecht in O. B. I. p. 263, note i.
Hilprecht there endeavours to prove that the title patesi first of all
' characterizes its bearer according to his religious position.' To
maintain this, he quotes the inscription of Mesilim, published in
R. A. iii. p. 5g. Unfortunately in the copy given there the first
line was only represented by one sign, namely DI (it is, as we
have seen, the second part of the name [Me]-DI=silm). 'The
inscription,' he says, ' to which I refer had defied the united efforts
of Oppert, Heuzey, and myself for a long while. But I am now
able to offer the following correct'^ interpretation.'
He then reads and translates it as follows : —
Sal
Decision !
lugal
Ninsugir (1. 6)
Khh
has appointed (1. 7)
sanga
the king (1. 2)
(ilu) Nin-su-gir
of Kish (1. 3)
{ilti) Nin-su-gir
to be priest (1. 4)
mu-gin
of Ningirsu (1. 5).
Lugal-kurum-zigum
Lugalkurumzikum
pa-te-si
is patesi
Shir-lpuryJia-^i]
of Shirpuda.
And then argues, ' The whole phraseology seems to be Semitic
rather than Sumerian (cf. also sanga, artificial ideogram composed
of sa +ga). The name means SharrukurumatshamS, " the king is
food of heaven," ' and to make it especially clear that this king
is indeed a Semite, he adds in parentheses, 'der Konig ist Himmels-
Speise.' ' K foreign ^ conqueror of Shirpurla, who is already a king,
in addition styles himself patesi of Lagash.' So far Hilprecht.
This ' foreign conqueror ' is, as we have seen, none other than
the patesi of Shirpurla ; he is in subjection to the Sa 1 i. e. to
[Mejsilim, king of Kish, for the inscription should be translated : —
^ Italicized by me.
144 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
1 [Mejsilim, 6 to Ningirsu
2 king 7 has presented it.
3 ofKish, 8 Lugalshuggur
4 high-priest (? or builder) of 9 is patesi
the house 10 of Shirpurla.
5 of Ningirsu,
The important point in Hilprecht's contention, however, is that
he makes Lugalkurumzikum a Semite, who (according to his
understanding was king of Kish, but actually) is a very old patesi
of Shirpurla. But there are other kings of Shirpurla who bear
Semitic names : —
Ur-Nina may be read KalbP-Nind, ' servant of Nind.'
Eannatum „ „ Bit-lami-uMn, 'the house of
heaven is stable.'
Enannatum „ „ Bel-iami-uMn, ' the lord of heaven
is righteous' (true, stable).
Entemena „ „ Bel-temenn , ' the lord is a (or of)
foundation.'
Engegal „ „ BH-higalli, ' lord of riches.'
Enshagkushanna „ „ Bil-multdl(i)-^ami, ' lord is the
wise one of heaven.'
Ur-Ba'u „ „ Kalbi-Bdu, ' servant of Ba'u.'
Gudea „ „ Ndbiu, 'preacher.'
Dungi „ „ Ba'u-uMn, ' Ba'u has established.'
'Erak2i[\\=Bel-emMi ', ' lord of strength.' Cornp. also the writing
Ih' with that of Il-h', which latter is undoubtedly the phonetic
writing of the former (C6ne, iii. 28, 34), the phonetic compl. M{/t),
Galet A, ii. 10. See also Lugalkigubnidudu = iarru-manzazu-
' For the reading of l/H = Kalbi or Kalab, see Hommel, P. S. B. A. xxi,
P- 132-
* Or Bll-emAM-danni. Comp. however Br. 6597, (dingir) h-kal-mag = Adar
hH emAki. But if this name is Semitic, then his son (?) Uriumma is also Semitic,
probably = Kalbi-unnubi ?
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 145
tdaklil, ' the king has finished the place,' and Lugalkisalsi = iarru-
^dpik-kisalli, ' the king is the builder of the terrace.'
The above-given names show conclusively that the representatives
of the dynasties of Kengi, Shirpurla ', Gishban, Erech, at this time
bore good Semitic names — a fact which, so far as it goes, would
lead us to class them under the Semitic rulers of Early Babylonia.
2. As regards Hilprecht's second argument, that Lugalzaggisi
must be a Semite, because certain of his phrases remind us forcibly
of those of the latest Assyrian monarchs, it will suffice to call
the attention of the reader to a certain passage occurring in the
statue B, col. v. 25-27, of Gudea, who is generally regarded as the
ruler who ' bezeichnet den eigentlichen Hohepunkt der sumerischen
Culiur' (Hommel, Gesch. p. 312). That passage reads: a-ab-ba
igi nim(a)-ta a-ab-ba sig-ga-ku, i. e. ' from the upper sea to the lower
sea ' ; comp. Lugalzag. ii. 8, 9, 4, 5.
According to Hilprecht's argument, Gudea would fulfil two
requirements which would justify us in calling him a Semite :
he has a good Semitic name, and uses good Semitic phrases.
And if Gudea is a Semite, clearly his son Ur-Ningirsu must be
one also. Thus one (the other is Ur-Ba'u = Kalbt-Ba'u) of the
representatives of the height of the sumerische Culiur becomes
a Semite.
3. But how is it with Hilprecht's third argument? Can we
similarly adduce Semitisms occurring in the inscriptions of the kings
of Shirpurla, Kish, &c. ? Certainly we can.
Let us begin with Shirpurla. The most important for our
purpose are : —
ul-la, Urukagina, Clercq, ii. pi. viii. col. v. 3 ; Entemena C6ne, vi. 5.
= Assyr. ulM, -/ rh^, H. W. B. p. 65 ; Hebr. ni'y,
Arab. ^.
e-^e-gal-kalam-ma, Urukag. Barrel-Cyl. i. 7.
= Assyr. Mt-higalli-kaldmi.
' If Ur-Nina is a Semite, then his son Akurgal is also. How this name
may be read in Semitic is hard to say, probably Amtl (or apit = aT)-BH
(kur-gal, see above) .
L
146 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
zu-ab, Ur-Nina, D^c. 2M8, No. i, passim.
= Assyr. apsu; comp. Hebr. DDK. Comp. Hommel,
Neue Kirchliche Zeitung, 1 8 90, p. 4 1 o- See however
Hilprecht, O. B. I. p. 255, note 6.
da-er, D^c. 4ter, f', iv. 3 ; Lugalzaggisi, O. B. I. 87, iii. 36 ; comp.
O. B. I. p. 261, note 4; H. W. B. 213.
= Assyr. ddril V nil; com^. J\i , J3 , Jio ; Hebr. -i^":!;
Arab. ij3,jS.i\\, nni nn, Ps. Ixi. 7, and I'll "'''l^^??,
Ps. xlv. 18.
sa-ga, inscript. of Mesilim.
= Assyr. iangii. We ought to read, however, here = e-ru.
^a-lam, Galet A, iv. 19 ; C6ne, vi. 20.
= Assyr. haldku, see H. W. B. p. 280, under ii'
{'kunstlich aus ffALAGGA gebtldet') ; comp. Hebr.
P^n ii. ; Aram, ihu, ^vjl, n^iiW, •I-.iVt^. See also
Delitzsch, Assyr. Gram. p. 115, § 49. no's-
ab-ba, C6ne, i. 3. ^
= Assyr. abu, Hebr. 3^, Aram. X3^, j.a/''; ^\, S-fl.
gi-na, Cone, i. 4.
= Assyr. Mnu, >/ Jtt, H. W. B. p. 321 ; comp. Hebr.
pa, r?*a, ylT, ^S^, W.
dam-ha-ra^, Cone, i. 26.
= Assyr. tamharu ; a T-formation of the V "IRD ; con-
tained in the Hebr. 1*no.
kalam-ma, Lugalzag. i. 5 ; comp. Barrel-Cyl. i. 7.
= Assyr. kaldmu{\\ V nl^a ; H. W. B. 329 ; comp. Hebr.
nP3 ; comp. also -'a, ^^.
um-ma-an^, unpublished C6ne of Urukag. ; see R. A. iv. 73, note 4.
' It will be noticed here that in the words dam-^a-ra, mai-ga-na, u-rig,
sa-dug, iig-ga, the soft consonants d, g become later on hard = t, k, even k ;
comp. also gu-za = KD3 ; li-il-gu-tu in O. B. I. Nos. i and 2 = lilkutu ;
A-ga-de = Ak{k)ad. On the other hand, comp. u-sa-za-ku-ni, ztra-su (sud-
li-la-ti), where the older s (is this Arabic influence?) becomes later on J. The
use of 1 for fl, i for p is probably due to the ' VulgSr-Babylonisch^
' Comp. also Hanpt, Akkadische u. Sumerische Keilschrifttexte, No. 10 (K.
EAULY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 147
= Assyr. ummdnu, -/ pi'obably = bDN ; comp. ni2N, iSI,
md-ga-na'^, R. S. 1897, p. :68, col. iv.
= Assyr. makkdnu ; M-formation of lltJ* ; Hebr. |3K' ;
^, JL; comp. IIB^P, Aram. [Sfo (and WiSfD),
M'^«v (Uoa:^). .
u-rtg'^, O. B. I. 87, iii. 25 (Lugalzaggisi).
= Assyr. urku, urMtu, p"ii, H. W. B. 243; comp. Hebr.
PlI, V%, (jV^j, la*-. (Originally: uriku, urikttu,
then shortened to urku, urMiu; comp. epiru, epru\
gimiru, gimru ; Arimu, Armu; Aribu, Ar5u.)
sa-dug ', le Clercq, ii. pi. viii. col. iv. 3.
= Assyr. sattUku, H. W. B. 513; comp. Hebr. nijiX,
Arab. iSii, Syr. \a\s (Hommel).
ztg-ga^, Galet A, Eannatum, iv. 26.
= Assyr. zdku ; comp. Hebr. nipij, Isa. 50. 1 1 ; V not pit,
nor jjX), but pit, H. W. B. 252. Comp. also ]A,T.
iu-nir, Galet A, iii. 17.
= Assyr. iurinnu.
But the most important of all is, that we find on a fragment of
a marble slab from Abu Habba, published in O. B. I. pi. vi, vii, viii,
which is undoubtedly much older than Sargon 1.' (3800), instead
of the so-called ' Sumerian ' form ^u-ba-ti{\. e. ' he (they) received '),
the forms: —
t'm-hur, pi. vi. col. ii. 9 ; ibid. col. iv. 3 (from end), col. v, vi ;
pi. vii. col. V, vi.
im-hur-ru, pi. vi. col. vii. 1. 9 ; pL vii. col. i ; pi. viii. No. 17 ; and
im-hur-ra,. pi. vii. col. vi. 1. 7.
So large a number and variety of Semitisms to be found in the
texts of these kings, who are generally supposed to be Sumerians,
133)) 25/26: kar-ra-du-um-Si=kar-rad-su-m; and iv. R. fJo. i, obv., 21:
M,'-bai-larn-cMii=Jii-sib-'ia (personal cofamunication of Prof. Hommel).
' See note i on previous page.
" Comp. e. g. the forms of 5^7 and DA, where ' the thumb is pressed on the
fingers'; see p. 8.
L 2
148 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
surely suffices to show that almost all the kings of whom we have
any notice may be, and probably are, Semitic kings.
But does this justify us in saying, with Thureau-Dangin, ' nous
/carUrons Thypothese dune langue non s^mitiquel R. A. iv. p. 73>
and call the t^o modes of writing (the Semitic and the Sumerian)
' Tun oil domine h phonMsme, t autre ou domine nd^ographisme ' f It
is true, when that scholar says (ibid.) : le phonitisme par ait avoir
/// d^gagi de t ideographisme dh une tres haute antiquM par les
habitants de la Babylonie du Nord. . . . Avec les rois d'Agad^ le
phon^tisme se complete et tend en mime temps a se r^pandre de plus en
plus, ainsi qtien timoignent les inscriptions de Kish, qui, idhgraphiques
avec Me-silim, Ur-zag-ud-du, et Lugal-tar-si, deviennent phonitiques
avec les rois . . . Uru-mu-ul et Ma-an-ii-tu-su ' — but the difficulty
here is this : if the people at so remote a time as 4200 b. c. could
use and write and understand two such widely different modes of
writing (the ' ideographisme ' and ' phone'tisme '), and if Hammurabi
(about 2288 B.C.) could write his inscriptions in two columns, the
' ideographic ' and ' phonetic ' column, how extremely educated and
highly civilized must people have been at this distant epoch !
This presupposes a civilization and learning so high and developed
as to be without precedent in the history of mankind. For such
a development we must in any case postulate a long series of
centuries. And further, to call the ' Sumerian ' mode of writing
' ideographic ' is not quite ad rem.
If we have such forms as ^ul, mu-^ul, ba-^ul, the first one may
be called ' ideographic ' and primitive, but the second and third
forms cannot. Mu and ba simply show that^«/ has to be taken as
a verb, and not as an adjective. Mu and ba indicate the person of
the verb and nothing else ; they do not belong to the ideogram. And
how shall we explain the ' infixes ' and ' postfixes,' the verb forma-
tion, and all the other pecuHarities of this ' ideographisme ' f how the
tablets and syllabaries and hymns, and other historical inscriptions
occurring in these two modes of writing ? All these facts surely
prove conclusively enough the existence of two different languages,
the Sumerian and the Semitic (see a very able discussion of this sub-
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 149
ject in Lehmann's SamaSSumukin, and Weissbach, Die Sumerische
Frage, especially pp. 150 fF.). Seeing that Semitisms occur in almost
all the earliest inscriptions so far known to us, and that the rulers
themselves may have been and probably were Semites — let us
confess this — then the other question arises : At what time did the
Semites come into the country, so as to induce the original
inhabitants to employ expressions foreign to their own language I
Where did they come from ?
To the last question, which has been repeatedly discussed by
scholars, different answers have been given. Some make Africa
the original home of the Semites ; others, Arabia ; and Hilprecht,
who last spoke of this problem, assigns for this purpose Kish, or
better, Harran, in the extreme north of Babylonia.
According to his theory, Lugalzaggisi, the great conqueror from
Gishban (Harran), was the first Semite to occupy any territory in
Babylonia, and thus opened the way for the Semitic population.
But Lugalzaggisi does not antedate Ur-Nina (see above, p. 9 ff.).
Ur-Nind is a Semite, as we have seen, consequently Semites were
in the country before Lugalzaggisi.
Gishban is not Harran, but the neighbouring state of Shirpurla ;
hence the Semites did not come from Harran, but actually occupied
already the whole country of Babylonia. Thus the two questions —
when did the Semites invade Babylonia? and whence did they
come ? — are still awaiting an answer. It is possible that some
tablets may give us a key to this problem, but so far these tablets
have not been found.
But further, if the Semites at so early a time as 4500 b. c.
(Urukagina) had possession of Babylonia and had adopted the old
language of the country, which language they interspersed with
their own idiom, they must have been for a long time resident in
the land. This would bring the immigration of the Semites back
to at least 5000 b. c. and earlier, when the Sumerian power began
to decay. We must therefore push back the height of Sumerian
influence to a yet more remote period.
Hence, whatever view we take in regard to the two peoples and
150 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
their languages, we are led to the same general result. Civiliza-
tion and history must go bach to at least 6600 b. c'
The First Dynagty of TJr.
Of Ur^— the Biblical ' Ur of the Chaldees '— we have already
heard at the time of Eannatum. It was situated on the western side
of the Euphrates, opposite the place where the Shatt-el-Hai flows
into it. Up to the time of Lugalzaggisi it may not have been of
very great importance. This latter ruler, however, ' raised it like
a steer to the top of the heaven ' (col. ii. 30) ; hence, at no long
period subsequent to Lugalzaggisi, we meet two kings, father
and son, ruling at Ur. It is not impossible that this dynasty may
itself have brought about the overthrow of Lugalzaggisi', as to
whose successors we have no information *. Probably also it took
possession of the more northern part of Babylonia (Nippur), for we
find that both these kings present vases to Enlil, the ' lord of the
lands.'
The names of these two monarchs forming the first dynasty of
Ur are —
Lugalkigubnidudu ", and his son ° (?)
Lugalkisalsi.
' For further discussion of the historical relation between the Semitic and
Sumerian tongues, see sub Kings of Guti and Lulubi, p. 178 ff.
" For a history of the excavations that went on at Ur (now called
Mugheir), see Taylor's and Loftus' Travels, &c., and Hommel, Geschichte,
pp. 113 ff., 212 ff.
^ If I understand the text correctly, this opinion may be found in the
words : ' when Enlil . . . added lordship to kingdom, establishing Erech as
(the seat of) the lordship.' Erech, which he established as ' (the seat oQ the
lordships then was added to his kingdom.
' Among the successors of Lugalzaggisi probably has to be placed a certain
Ezuab, king of Gishban-*'. See Dec. pi. 5, No. 3. Nothing but the name of
this king has come down to us.
" His inscriptions are to be found in O. B. I. Nos. 33, 24, 25, 86, and 88 ;
No. 86 translated by Hilprecht, ibid. pp. 271 and 272, note i.
' This is most probable, because in O. B. I. No. 86, pi. 37, both these
rulers are mentioned on the same tablet. Comp. also O. B. I. 89; Hilprecht,
ibid. p. 272, note 3.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 151
Their dominion extended over Ur, Erech, ahd Nippur, probably
also over Shirpurla, for the kings of the south could not have
gained possession of Nippur without passing Shirpurla. This
would explain Why we khow so very little aboiit Shirpurla at this
time. It is, however, remarkable that both these kings, in O. B. I.
86, pi. 317, should call themselves first ' kiiigs of Erech' and
then ' kings of Ur ' ; while, on the other hand, Lugalkigubnidudu,
in pi. 36, expressly says that Enlil added {tab) the lordship
{nam-etl) to the kingship (nam-lugal), which lordship so added
was, according to ll. 9-11, Erech. We would expect that, if he
were originally king of Ur, the title 'king of Ur' would come
first. Here then we have an analogy to and a confirmation of the
argument used in regard to Urzaguddu. The latter king had also
two titles, viz. ' king of Kish ' and ' king of . . . ,' and it was argued
that the latter title, ' king of . . . ,' was the original, i. e. Urza-
guddu became later on ' king of Kish.' So here ' king of Ur '
was the original title; Lugalkigubnidudu Subsequently became
' king of Erech \'
How long this dynasty flourished, how many rulers were com-
prised in it, and when and by whom it was overthrown, we cannot
tell. Probably, however, it was replaced by a mighty kingdom
which arose in the north (that of Agade)'', destined to bear
sway over ' the four corners of the world.'
The inscriptions of these two kings follow.
O. B. I. No. 86, according to Hilprecht, reads :
(dingir) En-lil i. e. When Enlil,
lugal-kur-kur-ge king of the lands.
' Comp. also the Inscription of Enne-Ugnn, 1. 13 ff., where the title 'king
of Kish ' follows that of ' king of the hordes of Gishban,' or better, that of
■kingofUh'a).
' In the above arrangement, as was already stated, we chiefly follow
Hilprecht ; our own impression, however, is that the first dynasty of Ur
followed upon that of Agade, although we are not able to adduce any decisive
arguments in favour of this view. See also p. 18, note 3.
152
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
Lugal-ki-gub-ni-du-du-ra
ud (ding''') En-lil-li
5 gu-zi-e {sic)-na-de-a
nam-en
nam-lugal-da
e (&K)-na-da-iab-ba-a
Unug-^'-ga
1 o nam-en
mu-ag-ge
Uru-um-^'-ma
nam-lugal
mu-ag-ge
1 5 Lugal-ki-gt^\ni-d\u-du-ne\
nam-gal-^ul-la-da
^.dingir) En-l!\it\
lu\gal-ni\
[a-mu-na-^ui^
to Lugalkigubnidudu —
when Enlil
announced life (to him),
(when) lordship
to kingship
he addedj ,
having made
Erech
the (capital of the) lordship,
(and) having made
Ur
the (capital of the) kingship ;
then Lugalkigubnidudu
for the great and joyful lot
to Enlil,
his king,
presented this.
3. According to Hilprecht, Sharru-manzazti-ushakHl, ' the king finislied
the place.'
5. sic Hilprecht. Better : ' Enlil, king of the lands, to Lugalkignbnidudu,
when Enlil with a propitious voice had called him.' Comp. R. S. 1897, p. 269,
note 2. gu-de-a = nabil.
8. tab. Hommel, Sum. Les. 117 = rad-U ii'.
15. ne ='this'; comp. O. B. I. 23: (dingir) En-lil-la Lugal-ki-gub-ni-
dti-du-ne, a-tnu-na-'iub ; Hilprecht, 1. 1. p. 260, note 3. O. B. I. Nos. 24 and
25, however, read : {dmgir) En-lil Lugal-ki-gub-ni-du-du a-mu-na-hib, with-
out the ' ne.'
16. gul — JiodA, ^idiiiu.
O. B. I. 86, pi. 37, may be read :
^(Dingir) £n-m]
\lugal-hur-kur-ra-ge\
Lugal-ki-gub-ni-du-du
lugal Unug-^'-ga-ge
5 lugal Uru-um-^'-ma-ka-ge
To Enlil,
king of the lands,
Lugalkigubnidudu,
king of Erech,
king of Ur,
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 153
Ltigal-si-kisal and Lugalsikisal,
lugal Unug-^^-ga-ge king of Erech,
lugal Uru-um-'''-ma king of Ur,
nam-ti-la-ku for their life,
10 {dingir) En-lil to Enlil,
lugal-ni tlieir king,
a-mu-na4ub they presented (it).
6. Lugal- si-kisal is written in O. B. I. No. 89, Lugal-kisal-si. The name
means : ' The king is builder of the terrace ' = Sarru-Mpik-kisalli.
The Fatesis of Shirpurla between Lummadur
and Ur-Ba'u.
Once more — before we leave southern Babylonia and pass over
to the north — we have to direct our attention to Shirpurla. The
traces which we possess of the life of Shirpurla and its patesis
during this time (i.e. 4100 b. c. — 3800 B.C.) are but fragmentary.
Only one patesi is known to us from a tablet recently published by
Thureau-Dangin in R. A. iv. No. iii. pi. iii. No. 9 (see the
translation given on p. 16). This patesi, Lugalanda by name,
cannot have lived very long after Lummadur, for the writing of
that tablet shows all the palaeographic peculiarities of the inscrip-
tions of Eannatum. Comp. e. g. the sign for ' king,' which is written
here gal-\-galu, and the sign for DA has still the ' thumb ' curved.
Probably he belonged to those patesis over whom Lugalzaggisi or
his successors may have ruled.
With the next two patesis, Lugalushumgal " and his son (?) (see
p. 20) Ur-E, we arrive at the time of -Sharganishardli, 3800 b. c.
A considerable gap in this period has still to be filled up. Let us
' The name Lugal-uium-gal occurs on the following tablets : —
R. A. iv. No. iii. pi. vii. 23 ; pi. viii. 25, 27, 28 ; pi, ix. 29, 30; pi. x. 32,
33 ; pl- xi- 34-
R. A. iv. No. i. p. i, 8, 11.
Comptes Rendus, 1896 (Dates of Sargon I. and Naram-Sin, by Thureau-
Dangin), Reprint, p. 9, i ; p. 10, 3, 4.
154 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
hope that the future excavations, combined with the industry of the
decipherer, will bring some light into this darkest of all periods in
Old Babylonian history.
Mentioning only another patesi that belongs to this period,
jjf.{dingir) jjf^ ^p^ 1 — whosc name is followed by \nam. f\ palesi
Uru-um-^'-ma (i. e. Ur) (R. A. iv. 78, and note i; ibid. pi. ix. 31, 8, 9,
and XV. 9) — we pass from the south to the north of Babylonia, i. e.
to the city of Agade.
Kings of Agade.
Agade, near the modern Abu-Habba, formed in olden times,
with Sippar, a double city. It was situated near the Euphrates
and north of Babylon. As early as 3800 b. c, Semitic kings
ruled in this city, extending their sceptres over the whole of
Babylonia.
The first king, as far as our knowledge goes, was Sharganisharali^,
' In any case, whether the name of this patesi of Ur be Ur-Utu or not,
it does not matter : this, however, is of historical importance, that at the
time of Lugalushnmgal and Naram-Sin (Sargon) there were in Vt patesis, thus
showing that the successors of the kings of the first dynasty of Ur had been
reduced to patesis by the king of the ' four quarters of the world.'
' For the meaning of his name, see note to O. B. I. No. I, 1. 3.
His inscriptions : —
iii. R. 4, No. 7 (legend) ; Winckler, K. B. iii'. p. 100, Anhang i.
V. R. 34 (fiminii) ; Winckler, ibid. p. 102 flf.
O. B. I. Nos. I, 2, 3 ; Oppert, R. A. iii. p. 20 ff. ; and Hilprecht in the intro-
duction to O. B. I. part i. p. 15.
To the kings of Agade belongs also O. B. I. 119 : A-ga-de-ki | a-na \ (.Uii)
BllA-MU-SUB (iddin).
Proc. Soc. Bibl. Arch. 1885, p. 68 ; Winckler, K. B. iii'. p. 100, No. i ;
A. B. K. No. 64.
L^on Heuzey, R. A. iv. p. 3, with Gilgamish legend. It reads :
^ar-ga-ni-'iar-AH O Sharginisharaii,
"sar king
A-ga-de-ki of Agade,
. . . ne-'iu-in-ta
apil Sum-iil") Ma-lik the son of Shnttimalik
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 155
cited by us as Sargon I. He was the son of a certain Itti-B61 '.
This latter is neither called a king nor even a patesi. In this we
may see a confirmation of the so-called ' legend of Sargon,' accord-
ing to which this monarch was ' of an inferior birth on his father's
side,' and so either a usurper or the founder of this dynasty of
Agade. This legend — probably written in the eighth century b. c. —
purports to be a copy of an inscription found on a statue of this
great king, and bears a certain similarity to the Biblical account of
Moses. It reads : ' Shargena, the powerful king, the king of Agade,
am I. My rnother was of noble family (?) (others : was poor), my
father I did not know, whereas the brother of my father inhabited
the mountains. My town was Azipir^nu, which is situated on the
bank of the Euphrates. My mother of noble family (? or, who was
poor) conceived me and gave birth to me secretly. She put me
into a basket of shurru (reeds?), and shut up the mouth (?) of
it (?) with bitumen ; she cast me into the river, which did not over-
whelm (?) me. The river carried me away and brought me to
sakkandku (Br. 9195) the shakkanaku
arad-ha (nitag-zu) is thy servant.
On the side : a-na AL-LA, i. e. to Alia.
Leon Henzey, R. A. iv. p. 5 (with ' holy tree '), tablet is directed to Lugal-
usbumgal, patesi of Shirpurla.
Ibid. p. 8, ■ Lugal-uium-^al . . . arad-ka.'
Plans de I'^poque de Sargon I'ancien et de Naram-Sin, by Thureau-Dangin,
in R. A. iv. p. 20 ff.
C. J. Ball, Light from the East, p. 5a.
Contract-tablets of the time of Sargon L and Naram-Sin, Thureau-Dangin,
R. A. iv. No. iii. No. 13-75.
Un Fragment de Stile de Victoire d'un Roi d' Agade, Thureau-Dangin, R. S.
1897, p. 166 ff. ; also published in Dec. pi. 6^'=, No. 311-3 c.
Inscriptions of Nab<i-na'id, passim.
Menant, Cat. de la Collection de le Clercq, i. pi. v. No. 461. It reads:
Sar-ga-niAar-dli, iar, A-ga-de-^', Ib-ni-'iarri, dup-sar arad-ka {NITAG-
ZU) ; see Hommel, Gesch. p. 302. Also published in A. B. K. No. 65 ; comp.
Winckler, K. B. iii'. p. 100, No. i.
Scheil, Listes onomastiques, redig^es d'apris les Textes de Sargani, Z. A. xii.
P.331-
' Perhaps shortened from Itti-BH-bal&tu-, ' with Bel is life ' ; Hilprecht,
O. B. I. p. 15, note 9.
156 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
Akki, the drawer of water. Akki, the drawer of water, took me
up in . . . Akki, the drawer of water, reared me to boyhood.
Akki, the drawer of water, made me a gardener. During my
activity as gardener, Ishtar loved me. X + 4 years I exercised
dominion, . , . years I commanded the black-headed people (i. e.
the Semites) and ruled them,' &c. ^ The rest of this legend tells
us something about his campaign against Dfirilu on the borders of
Elam ; it is however too fragmentary to be coherent.
In connection with this legend we would call the attention of the
reader once more to the fact that not merely the identity of this
Shargena with our Sharganisharali '', his deeds and warlike expedi-
tions recorded in the so-called Tablet of Omens with the date of
his rule, have been doubted, but even his very existence '.
A series of new facts connected with the time of Naram-Sin
and Sharganisharali have since come to light by the publication
of a great number of contract-tablets, written during the reign of
these kings. These tablets are to be found in R. A. iv. No. iii.
Hence it is now impossible to doubt the historicity of Shargani-
sharili, as was done by Niebuhr, Chronologic der Geschichte Israels,
Aegyptens, Babyloniens, und Assyriens, Leipzig, 1876, p. 75.
Down to the time of Hilprecht's publication of O. B. I. part i,
our knowledge of Sargon I. was almost entirely drawn from the
' legend ' and the ' Tablet of Omens.' Hence it happened that
the great deeds which were attributed to Sargon and Naram-Sin in
that ' Tablet of Omens ' were said to be ' purely legendary ' (so by
' See Winckler, K. B. iii'. p. loi f.
^ See above, p. 6 ff.
■■ This was mainly done because it seemed impossible that there could
have existed at about 3800 B. c. (200 years after the Creation according
to Usher !) such a mighty monarch. At the present stage of our know-
ledge of this period we are fully justified in saying, with Hilprecht (O. B. I.
p. 241) : ' Behind Sargon I. and Naram-Sin there lies a long and uninter-
rupted chain of development covering thousands of years ; and those powerful
rulers of the fourth millenium before Christ, far from leading us back to
the " dawn of civilization," are at the best but two prominent figures from a
middle chapter of the early history of Babylonia.'
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 157
Winckler, Geschichte Babyl. und Ass^r. p. 38). Others thought
that his deeds had been simply projected backwards (so Maspero,
Dawn of Civilization, New York, 1895, p. 599: ' Sargon II. is he
who is projected backward ') ; others again, not believing that
Sargon I. could have undertaken such expeditions and have become
practically the ' king of the four corners of the earth,' invented
another king Sargon (so Hommel, Geschichte, Berl. 1883, p. 307,
note 4 ; this Sargon he places at about 2000 b. c).
Thanks to the excavations at Telloh and the industry and
scholarship of Thureau-Dangin, we are now in a position to prove
that the statements of the ' Tablet of Omens ' are correct in almost
every particular.
Let us hear what this ' Tablet of Omens ' has to say (see
iv. R'*. 34, and Winckler, K. B. iii ^ p. 103). Eleven of these ' omens '
are ascribed to Sargon and three to Naram-Sin. They generally
begin with the phrase : ' When the moon was in such and such
position,' then Sargon, &c.
The first omen records Sargon's expedition to and subjection of
Elam.
The second tells how he marched to the land Aharri * (i. e. the
West-land), and subjected it, and that his army subjugated the
kibrdti irlitta, i. e. ' the four corners of the world.'
The third (see above, p. 18) tells us that he brought sorrow
upon Kish and Babylon, and built a city after the pattern (?)
of Agade, and called it UB-DA-^*, i. e. ' place (city) of the
world.'
The fourth records another expedition against the west and the
taking possession of the four corners of the earth. So also the fifth
omen.
The sixth omen is too fragmentary to yield any certain sense.
The seventh gives us a fuller account of his expedition against
Aharri ' ; he crosses the sea of the west and wages war against it
for three years, takes it, erects there his statues, and transports the
prisoners, whom he had taken, over land and sea.
' So Winckler ; read Mar-tu-ki.
158 EAULY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
The eighth describes the repairing of one of his palaces, which
he calls ' E ki-a-am t-m-lik' i. e. ' the house : " so let us walk." '
In the next we hear of a campaign against a certain KashtubilTa
of Kasalla, who had revolted. Sargon goes against him, conquers
him and his army, and destroys the rebellious country.
The tenth probably is one of the most important. It reads:
' Sargon, against whom under this omen the elders of the whole
country had revolted, and in Agade had shut him up — Sargon went
out, conquered them and cast them down, subdued their army,
and . . .'
The last omen tells us something about Sargon's campaign
against the land Suri, how he overcame it and took it, and how he
destroyed its army.
The two omens relating to Naram-Sin record a campaign against
Apirak (Omen i.) and against Magan (Omen ii.). In both ex-
peditions Naram-Sin was so successful, that he even took captive
the kings of these countries, viz. RIsh-Rammin, king of Apirak,
and N. N., king of Magan.
According to this ' Tablet of Omens,' then, Sargon I. subdued
Elam, the 'West-land,' brought woe upon Babylon and Kish,
conquered the country Kasalla, suppressed a revolt which had
arisen against him while on his expeditions, and finally subdued the
land Suri ' in its totality ' j and Naram-Sin was successful in his
expeditions against Apirak and Magan.
Can we prove from contemporary inscriptions of Sargon L and
Naram-Sin the correctness of the statements of this ' Tablet of
Omens,' which confessedly is a later copy belonging to Ashur-
banipal's library, made from an older inscription ?
Thanks once more to the publications of Thureau-Dangin in
Comptes Rendus, 1896, p. 355 ff., and in R, A. iv. No. iii., we are
now in a position to do this. Among them we find tablets (pi. vi.
No. 1 6, envers) which expressly record Sargon I.'s victory —
(a) over Elam (comp. Omen i.).
In ntenit la\tti\ ' In the year when
' Written IN I. MU.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 159
Sar-ga-ni-Mr-dli Sargon I.
KASKAL-'Mk'^ Elcmtu-^'''^ made a warlike expedition
against Elam
h Za-ha-ra\-a f\ and against Zajiara,
in Ji-H^ Uh-'^' opposite tp Uh,
u SA G-GUB ' ti-ku-\nii\ * and [when he made] a
SAG-GUB.
(S) over the West'land : Mar-tu-*» = Amurru = Aharru
(Winckler). (Comp. Omen ii.)
L. c. pi. vi. No. 1 7 :
In titenit iailt In the year when
Sar-ga-ni-'Sar-dli Sargon I.
MAR-TU-am (read Amurram) ° against the land of the Amorites
[sc. KASKAL-ME ha-gar~ra-d\ [made a campaign.]
With this compare R. A. iv. p. 78, note 2, where Thureau-
Dangin mentions a tablet in the Museum of Constantinople which
partly reads : iu-nigin 10 kal {ga)lu ia Martune-^''m.e, i. e. total :
10 slaves, men from the West-land.
(f) over Gutim (Kurdista,n), whose king, Sharlak, he takes
captive.
L. c. pi. v. No, ig (written in Sumerian) :
Lugal-uium-gal Lugalushumgal
pa-ie-si patesi °.
' KASKAL, Br. 4454: liarrdnu, H. W. B. 29T ; Zug, Feldiug; MM, Br.
2804, taidzu. Thureau-Dangin translates KASKAL-MM iikun by le joug
. . . a imposi. 1
' For in Jt-ti, see H. W. B. p. t,\<j = ina pAti.
= SAG-GUB { = LI), Sayce, P. S. B. A., Jan. 1899, p. 22 = ' boundary-
stone.' Thureau-Dangin, 'tribute.'
* iikunu. TIius we should read, according to R. A. iv. iii. pi. v. 13; hence
we must supply a 'ia before Sharganisharali.
° According to Thureau-Dangin this line is followed in a variant from the
Museum of Constantinople by in ba-sa^ar iadS, i. c. ' dans les escarpemenis des
monlagnes' (Compt. Rend.,, 1896, Reprint, p. 10).
' So in a variant from the Museum of Constantinople.
i6o
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
MU KASKAL-ME Gu-
ba-gar-ra-a
Ibid., No. 13 :
In Utenit latti
\Sar\-ga-ni-lar-dli
In the year when (the king) made
a campaign against Gutim.
In the year when
Sargon I.
\U^-SIG ^-My ('■'«) A-nu-ni-tim established the US-SI G of the
temple of Anunitim
and the V^-SIG of the temple
of^-^
in Babylon,
and when he
took captive
Sharlak (in K^^yr.-=Etel-la-ibniT),
the king of Gutim.
j-a-*' (Compt. Rend., 1896, Reprint,
\p. U&-SIG b^yuiu) A-E
in Bdb-ili-^'
il-ku-nu
u ^- Sar-la-ak
lar Gu-ti-im-'^'
ik-mi-v}
(d) over Erech and .
p. 10, No. 4 ').
' Uh-SIG. Thureau-Dangin, R, A. iv. p. 22 : ' ks assises'; Sayce,
P. S. B. A., Jan. 1899, p. 22, note i : ' platform 1' Anunit is, according to
iii. R. 66, 3, 24, obv., 5, the belit of Akkad.
' ik-mi-h. Uncontracted form in rel. clause for ikmA, V HDO, H. W. B.
334-
' For other dated tablets from the time of Sargon I. and Naram-Sin, comp.
Thureau-Dangin, Comptes Rendus, 1896, p. 355 £f., and Sayce, P. S. B. A.,
Jan. 1899, p. 22 ; and see R. A. iv. iii. pi. v. No. 14:
In iitlnit 'iatti In the year when
Sar-ga-ni-'iar-ili Sargon I.
[ l/\S-SIG btt {ilf) BH established the US-SIG of the temple
\in\ Nippur-ki of Bel
\{i-ku-nu\ in Nippur.
L. t. pi. vi. No. 18 (written in Sumerian) :
w« E-Gli-KIN- TI In the year when the king built
ba-ru. the temple oi G/S-KIN-TI.
L. c. pi. vi. No. 19 (comp. R. A. iv. p. 22) :
In iiiinii iatti In the year when
aiu) Na-ra-am.-(iM Sin Naram-Sin
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY i6l
Lugal-ulun-gal Lugalushumgal
pa-te-si patesi.
mu KASKAL-ME In the year when
Unug-J''-a a campaign against Erech
it . . . su-^'-a and . . . su
(sc. ba-gar-ra-d) he (either Sargon I. or
Naram-Sin) made.
In these tablets the following lands are mentioned as stand-
ing in close business relations either with Shirpurla or with
Agade: viz. Magan (bronze from Magan), Meluhha, Elam, Az,
Kish {dlu Kfs-ki), Nippur (No. 14), Ur (No. 31')" Erech (No.
41), and Gishban (see R. A. iv. p. 78, note 6 : 1,540 udu \ 854
uz II lu-nigin 2,394 udu-zun \ udu Gis-ban-^^-kam || Vr-hd-e Unug-^'-
ku mu-gui-gub, i. e. 1,540 sheep, 854 (lambs) ; in all 2,394 sheep,
sheep from the land of Gishban, Urshid has brought them to
Erech). Among the names of cities which occur are KA-
DINGIR-^' (= Babylon, No. 13, env. 6), Kt-nu-nir-k' {Bor-
sippa), Innanna-ab-^^ (No. 41, env. 3), Uh-^^ (No. 41, env. 3),
Innanna-Erin-^', Sippar ' ; and, what is especially important, the
following parts or suburbs of Shirpurla itself: Gir-su-^', Ntnd-^',
Erm-^'. Hence the statements of this ' Tablet of Omens ' can
no longer be doubted. The ' ten slaves ' from the West-land were
undoubtedly the result of the victorious expeditions against the
west. That Sargon I. was in possession of Nippur is not only
evident from these contract-tablets, but also from O. B, I. No. 3,
which reads :
US-SIG btt ('■'«) BH established the US-SIG of the
in Nippur-ki temple of Bel in Nippur,
\ii\ bit V^") Fstar and of the temple of
[in In'\nanna-ab-^i Ishtar
[U-ku-'\nu, in Innanna-ab.
' C. J. Ball, Light from the East, p. 52 : Sar-ga-ni-'iar-AU, iar, A-ga-de-ki,
a-na, (flu) Samai in (dmgir) UD-KIB-NUNM (= Sippar. For the sign
dingir^ comp. also O. B. I. 63, 6, 7: Ka-da-ds-ma-an-Ttirgu, lugal (dinsir)
KA-DINGIR-RA-I'i) A-MU-SUB { = iddin).
M
l62 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
Sar-ga-ni-iar-dli i.
e. Sargon,
sar
king
A-ga-de-'''
of Agade,
bdni [BA-GIM)
the builder
Mt {E)
of the temple
(ihi) Ba (*«^'> En-UT)
of B61.
We have already seen (p. 7) that he exercised dominion over
Shirpurla. Lugalushumgal was at this time patesi of that city. In
his inscriptions he calls himself arad-ka, ' thy servant ' (sc. Sargon's
or Naram-Sin's). Indeed, we have some fragments of an inscribed
' stele d!un roi d'Agad^,' which — if we accept Thureau-Dangin's
view — may refer to this very conquest of Sargon I. over Shirpurla
and the dividing up of its territory (see R. S. 1897, p. 166 ff.). The
dominion of Agade over Magan in the south-west is also apparent
from a tablet of Naram-Sin himself; see i. R. 3, No. 7 : nam-ra-ag
Magan-'^', the 'prince' of Magan. To the north the empire
reached even as far as Apirak '- and Guti, ' the land east of the
lower Zab, in the upper section of the region through which the
Adhem and the Dijala rivers flow' (Delitzsch, Parad. pp. 233-237),
and over the whole of Armenia. This is evident from a tablet
recently published by Thureau-Dangin in Comptes Rendus, 1899,
p. 348, pi. I, which reads :
('■'«) Na-ra-am-^'^"^ Stn Naram-Sin,
da-LUM { = da-num) the mighty
lar king
ki-ib-ra-tim of the four
5. ar-ba-im corners of the world,
SA G-GI&-RA {=mr) the conqueror
Ar-ma-ivi- of Armenia
ii and
Thus the empire of Sargon I. and Naram-Sin extended from the
'' This land has to be sought in the north-east of Babylonia ; see Hilprecht,
O. B. I. p. 2 3.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 163
uttermost south of Babylonia, Erech, over Ur, Shirpurla, Babylon,
Kish, Agade, and northward to Apirak and Guti, from the country of
the Elamites in the east, over Dflrilu to Magan (on the eastern
boundary of Arabia), and even to the land of the Amorites (Martu,
Kasalla), which latter, i. e. Kasalla, is also mentioned in the inscrip-
tions of Gudea as ' a mountain of Martu.'
So great and extensive a dominion might justly be called a Mrrdt
kibrat arba'tm (kingdom of the four corners of the world), and yet
Sargon himself never assumes this title. He left that for his son,
he himself being satisfied with ' ^arra dannu Har Agade,' ' the mighty
king, king of Agade,' or ' dannu lar Agade' or only 'far Agade'
Nabfi-nS,'id in his inscriptions calls Sargon I. ' "sar BdMli', king of
Babylon, probably on account of the buildings erected there by
him; comp. R. A. iv. No. 3, pi. v. 13, envers.
. In contrast to his father, Naram-Sin assumes the title lar kibrat
arhdi, ' king of the four quarters of the world.' The meaning of
this title is evident. In the ' Tablet of Omens ' we saw that Sargon,
after having conquered Elam, ' subdued " the land of the west,"
conquered the four quarters of the world.' In other words : Sargon,
being lord over the whole of Babylon (extending from the north
to the south), and over Elam in the east, had still to conquer
the wes/. Having succeeded in this, his son assumes the title
' king of the four corners of the world,' ruling over a kingdom
bounded by the Elamite mountains in the east, the mountains of
Armenia in the north, the Mediterranean Sea in the west, and
the Persian Gulf in the south. The capital of this mighty kingdom
was Agade.
The title ' sar kibrat arba'i ' may ' have the same meaning and
carry the same force as that old title of Lugalzaggisi, viz. ' lugal
kalama ' (king of the world), which former title was later on trans-
lated back into the Sumerian by lugal an-ub-da-tab-tab-ba ", but
' For this reason I refer the Semitic inscription of Dungi, which generally
has been attributed to Dungi I. of the second dynasty of Ur, to Dungi III.
of the fourth dynasty of the same city.
'■' This, however, is very doubtful, we may say even impossible — in spite of
M 2
164 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
it is not an equivalent of iar /^zwaA' (Hilprecht, O. B.I. p. 270),
because
(i) such a title is not known in those times ; and
(2) hr hVmti has to be read Ur Kfi, i. e. king of Kish
(see above, p. 126, and below, p. 214 ff.).
These two rulers were not only mighty conquerors and heroes in
war, but also great administrators of their vast dominion. They
create high dignitaries, whose office it was to provide for the internal
welfare of the country. Among these we find the judge {daianu), the
shabril (H. W. B. p, 639), and the shakkandku.
Social and commercial life attained to a height it had never
reached before. Business relations were maintained throughout
all these subject regions. The entertainment of the people was
entrusted to the musicians (R. A. iv. No. iii. pi. xi. No. 35, env. 8),
while regularly constituted physicians (R. A. ibid. pi. x. No. 32,
env. 6) cared for their bodily welfare. In short, we may rightly say,
with Thureau-Dangin, 1. c. p. 79 : 'La remarquable impulsion donn&
a toutes les branches de Tactivite, par le plein ^panouissement et le
rayonnemeni dans toutes les directions d'un art, dune culture, dune
civilisation dont le lent de'veloppement avail rempli les siecles et les
milUnaires pr^c^denis, Tepoque de Sargan et de Narani-Sin marque
certainement un point culminant dans I'histoire de tancien Orient'
Before we leave these two rulers, it may be well to notice one or
two points of unique interest not previously mentioned. The first
is, that these rulers sometimes write their names with the ilu (god)
sign preceding, and that Naram-Sin — and he only — even calls him-
self ilu Agade-''', ' god of Agade.' This use of ilu in the names
('■'«) Sar-ga-ni-sar-dli and (''") Na-ra-am-V'") Sin is altogether new
and unprecedented; even the writing oi^insir) Nind-Ur is not an
exception, for this latter name is written by Eannatum always, and
Hilprecht, O. B. I. p. 270, according to whom the iarrAt ItiTsaii is the ' equiva-
lent ' of the Sumerian nam-lugal-kalama, which latter ' was translated ' by
the Semites under Sargon I. into the Semitic 'iarrui kibrat arba'im. ' And the
later Sumerian nam-lugal an-ub-da tab-tab-ba is simply a translation of the
Semitic title back into the sacred Sumerian language of Semitic scribes of
the third millennium B. c'
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 165
even by Ur-Nind once (see D^c. pi. 2^^^, No. i), in this wise :
Ur-{di"eir) JSlind, showing that this latter is the correct way of read-
ing and writing, and that the {dingir = Uu) does not belong to the
whole name, but only to the goddess Nin^ ^.
One inscription of Naram-Sin, with this extraordinary title, ilu
A-ga-de-^', has been given above, p. 7. Owing to the importance
of this subject for the history of religions, we give the other inscrip-
tions also : —
R. A. iv. No. iii. pi. vii. No. 22 :
(ilu) Na-ra-am-''" Sin Naram-Sin,
ilu A-ga-de-^i the god of Agade.
Ibid. No. 23 :
('■/«) Na-ra-am-'^''") Sin O Naram-Sin,
ilu A-ga-de-^' god of Agade,
Sar-ru ^-ii-da-gal Sharruishdagal
dup-sar the scribe
arad-ka {NITAG-ZU) is thy servant.
In R. A. iv. No. iii. pi. vii. No. 26, we have even only :
ilu A-ga-de-''* O god of Agade,
Ur-da Urda
dup-sar the scribe
arad-ka {nitag-su) is thy servant.
From a comparison of these three inscriptions, it seems beyond
question that the 'god of Agade' mentioned in No. 26 is none other
than Naram-Sin himself.
But the inscriptions not only call him ' god of Agade,' but also
' For the writing (dingir) En-ieme- . . . (O. B. I. 115), see note i on p. 181.
' ru = sign for URU.
l66 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
EN-MEN-AN-NA ; see Rec. de Trav. xix. p. 187. The tablet
published there by Thureau-Dangin reads : —
(iiu) Na-ra-am-'-''"'' Sin Naram-Sin,
tlu A-ga-de-^i the god of Agade,
EN-MEN-AN-NA the . . .
The third line may be translated either the lord {eri) of the
heavenly (an-nd) tiara (?k«« = agA, Br. 551 1), or the lord {en) of
the exalted [an-na — dru) tiara (jneri), and may be read accordingly
either as hel agesamdmi, or bel agg sirt.
There hardly can be any doubt that this latter title {en-men-an-na)
as well as the former {ilu A-ga-de-i'') belongs to Naram-Sin, if we
compare them with the other titles which this king bears, viz.
sar {lugat) A-ga-de-^' (see R. A. I.e. No. 24), or Jfar (Br. 4297)
ki-ib-ra-iim ar-ba-im (see O. B. I. No. 120, col. ii. i, 2).
If Naram-Sin could call himself ^srf, he might equally well apply
to himself the title ' lord of the heavenly tiara.' What induced
these kings to put the sign of god before their names, we cannot
tell. We know, however, that the same usage prevailed among the
later rulers of Babylonia (comp. dynast y of Ur IV. and Isin), who
even had temples built in their honour, and compelled the people
to offer sacrifices to them (comp. Gimil-Sin, Rec. de Trav. xix.
p. 186, and the cult of Gudea under Ur IV., ibid, xviii. p. 64 ff.),
Thureau-Dangin may be right when he says (ibid. xix. p. 187) :
' Shargani el surtout Naram-Sin aient subi, en ce qui touche la
conception du caractere royal, Vinfluence plus ou mains lointaine
des id/es ^gyptiennes,' especially when we remember that the
former extended his kingdom as far as Syria-Palestine (the West-
land = Martu), and thus may easily have come in contact with the
Egyptians ^-
Another point of extreme interest is this. We find on the seals
belonging to the time of SharganisharSli a scene taken from the so-
called 'Nimrod Epos.' This scene represents Isdubar or Gilgamish
_ ' Comp. however what has been said about the title ' ilu ' under Ur IV.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 167
(the Greek Hercules, the Biblical Nimrod) as fighting a lion.
This scene is very often found in later times; and as this epos
also contains the ' Assyrian flood-story,' we have every reason to
suppose that it was already well known as early as 3800 b.c.
The gii zid-da, ' the tree of life ' (comp. Gen. ii. 1 7), is represented
on another tablet (R. A. iv. p. 5), showing that this symbol was
also old.
The execution of both of these works of art is wonderful, and
so well conceived that it fills us with astonishment to find it dating
from a period as early as 3800 b. c.
In conclusion, let us hear Sargon I. himself, in his two longest
inscriptions, published by Hilprecht in O. B. I. Nos. i and 2 : —
O. B. I. No. I.
('■'«) Bel (*«^''- £n-hT) -For BSl,
U-GAL-BA {=bttisu rahit) his great lord ;
Sar-ga-nt-sar-dli Sharganishardli,
da-LUM the mighty
2. u-gal-ba, a pure Sumerian expression for biliiu rabA. u = bUu ; gal =
rabA ; ba = Su. Or should we read u-gal-litn (sic), phonetically for UD-
GAL-LIM, and comp. H. W. B. 197 b, ^grosser SturmwinofX
3. Here written without the z7«-sign before it. In O. B. I. 2, 1. i, we have
(ilti) Sargani-iar-dli. For the different readings of this name, see note on p. 6.
As regards the meaning of the name, only the second part is clear, viz. iar-dli.
' king of the city.' With dlu = Sam. URU zxt also composed the names Bin
gani-'sar-&li and Alu-u'iariid Uru-ka-gi-na, and also, at the time of Ur IV.
Lugal-urU'da, (dmeir) Utu-uru-na, and others. Oppert, in Z. A. iii. 1 24, trans
lates it by ^fort est le roi de la ville.' Sar-ga^nu, according to v. R. 41, 29 a, b,
means dannu. Probably we have here a noim-formation in an (Del. Gram. § 65,
No. 3,1;) from the root T^, which may be contained also in the Hebrew proper
name jn'tJ' (Gen. xi. 20-23) and have the meaning ' to be powerful, mighty.'
In later times the name was shortened to Sar- GE-na (the GE was originally
pronounced as ga ; comp. Sum. kur-gena = Assyr. kurkanA), and when people
forgot the true meaning of this word {^ar-ge-nd) they explained it, according
to ' folk-etymology,' as Sharru-kenn, ' the true king.' The Hebrew transcribes
this name by fi5"lp (with Raphe over the 3) ; see O. B. I. p. 18, note 4.
4. Here, as in O. B. I. Nos. 2, 3, written da-LUM, according to the
' Tablet of Omens,' where we have the same title (^iarru dannu "sar Agade-ki),
these signs correspond to ' dan-nu.' See also Jensen, K. B. iii '. p. 116, note 5.
i68 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
5 sar king
A-ga-de-i'i ofAgade,
bdni (BA-GIM) the builder
E-KUR (i. e. bit iadi) of E-kur,
m the temple
10 ('■'«) Bel {fi»si'- En-lit) of B61,
IN EN-LIL-^' {=Nippur->") the guardian (?) of Nippur.
la duppa Whosoever this
sa-a tablet
u-sa-za-ku-ni shall destroy,
15 (ii«) Bel {^'"e''' En-lil) BSl
7. ba-gim = Sumerian ; maybe read either idni (;pa.it\c.) or idni (prat.).
8. E-KUR, ' mountain-house.' Among the kings of Babylonia who re-
paired and added to this 'E-kur' are to be found: Naram-Sin, Dnngi I.,
Ur-Ninib, Bur-Sin I., Ishnie-Dagan, Bur-Sin II., Kurigalzu, Ramman-Shumusur,
and Esarhaddon. For 1 good history of the E-kur, and the discoveries that
have been made there, see Hilprecht, O. B. I. p. 229 ff.
II. For IN — 'guard,' 'guardian,' comp. note to OB. I. 5. It also is
found in O. B. I. 120 : (dingir) En-ki IN ki-ib-ra-tim ar-ba-im (which clearly
shows that IN latze cannot he = ' ina,' h\A = blla); R. A. Jv. No. iii. 13:
(ding-ir) A-E IN KA-DINGIR *«■ (here /A^ probably = ' «««,' so also above ?).
Each city had its own IN = ' guardian.' For IN, an abbreviation for ina,
see H. W. B. p. 95. So always in the phrase in i'itinit iatti; comp. dates of
Sargon I. and Naram-Sin, and see Hamm. Louvre, ii. 7, 15.
13. The first sign has been variously read. Scheil, Rec. de Trav. xv. 62-64,
reads it sig = i^appii ; Oppert, R. A. iii. p. 24, kat + dual signs = kdtd ;
Hilprecht, O. B. I. p. 13, sh^. All these identifications are wrong; it is the
sign si-gunnH, and as such has to be read s4 ; see E. C. 48. So also now Hil-
precht (personal communication). Sii-a=su-a, which we expect according to
the context. Su-a = shtiatum, see H. W. B. pp. 631, 645 ; comp. StMe de
Zohab I., Rec. de Trav. xiv. pp. 100-106, 11. 9-12 : 9, !fa sa-al-mi-in ; 10, an-
ni-in; 11, u DUB BA-AM {BA-AM = shu'atu + am +shu^atam, it being
parallel to annin); 12, ii-^sa-ea-ku. It occurs again in the inscription of
Lasirab, 1. 14 : ia duppa sii-a u-sa-za-ku-ni, Winckler, Z. A. iv. p. 406 ; in
O. B. I. No. 2, 1. 14, and No. 120, col. iii. 6. For j = J comp. u-sa-za-ku-ni
( = Arabian influence (?) ; see the Saphel of the South Arabic inscriptions).
14. u-sa-za-ku-ni. So also Lasirab, 1. 15. In O. B. I, No. 2 the J7is left
out. Stfele de Zohab I., I. 1 2, has u-ia-za-ku. It is the Shaphel (iii ') of the root
■^Ti or i?13 ; see H. W. B. p. 457, and Hilprecht, O. B. I. p. 14, note i.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
169
il
('■^«' Ihar {^ingir Innamd)
20 tlid-su
li-zu-hu
h "
zira (&E-ZIR)-su
li-il-gu-tu
and
Shamash
and
Ishtar
his foundation
they may remove,
and
his seed
they may exterminate.
20. lidu, Br. 4811 ; H. W. B. p. 142.
21. H-zu-^u. O. B. I. No. 2, 1. 21, H-iu-ia; Lasirab, 1. 23, li-su-ia;
1/ riDX H. W. B. 471. Soft z becomes hard s. Comp. also Delitzsch, Gram.
§ 90 c, for d of the third pers. masc. pi.
24. li-il-gu-tu. O. B. I. No. 2, 23, U-il-gu-da; so also Lasirab, 1. 26.
StMe de Zohab I., li-il-ku-t[u'] ; V riph, H. W. B. 385. Hilprecht, 1. c,
takes as the root of this verb tip? ? giox k = Vulg. Babylonian.
With 1. 12 ff. comp. O. B. I. 63, 14 ff., which gives the Sumerian :
{gd)lu-mu-sar-ra-ba
15 llu-ne-id-ur (Bt. jil^,paWu) e-a
Idingir) En-lil lugal-U
lugal kur-kur-ra-ge
gir-U ge-en-bur-ri
t^ kul-ii
20 ge-en-Hl-li
Whosoever this virriting
shall blot out,
Enlil, his king,
king of the lands,
his foundation may he remove
and his seed
may he destroy.
O. B. I. No. 2,
('■'») ^ar-ga-ni4ar-dli
apil li-tP-yi"') Bn (fi"Sir En-lit)
da-LUM
Sar
5 A-ga-de-^'
il
Sharganisharali,
the son of Itti-BSI
the powerful,
king
of Agade
and
' DA = i(ti, Br. 6551. 77'=phon. compl. It-H-BH, so. baldtu, i. e. with
Bel is life. Scheil, Rec. de Trav. xv. 87 : iur = banda = littuiti) pour ilidli\
lyo EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
sub ^-H-la-li of the dominion
('•/«) Bel {^'»S''- En-lil) of Bai,
bdni (BA-GIM) the builder
10 E-KUR {bll-sadf) ofE-kur,
bii ('■'«) Bgl {dingir En-lit) the temple of Bgl,
IN EN-LIL-ki (Nippur-''') the guardian (?) of Nippur.
ia duppa Whosoever this
sH-a tablet
1 5 lu-^sa-za-ku-ni shall destroy
(<•/«) Bel {^'"^''' Enlit) BSl
ii and
('■'«) ^cwaJf ('^'"-f''' Utti) Shamash
ilid-su his foundation
2 li-zu-ha they may remove,
a and
2/ra {$E-ZIR)-su his seed
li-il-gu-da they may exterminate.
There is little more to be added in regard to the history of
Naram-Sin'. That he was the son of Sargon I.'', we know only
' The first sign is not yet understood. Scheil, 1. c. : sag-u-la-ti ; Oppert,
R. A. iii. p. 22 : ' ris {SAK) ba-u-la-ti, " chef du domaine de Bel" Le signe
ba se trouve icrit au-dessus de ris {SAK) ? ' E. C. 198 = 81. 820. Hilprecht,
O. B. I. p. 15, note 6, identifies it with su = Br. 802, reads sAlati (or pi. suldti),
and compares nppb (Jer. xxxiii. 34). In all probability we have here the sign
sub (Br. 856) ; as such it is the same as Br. 820. (See also H. W. B. p. 350 b,
sub sarabu.) Sub-u-la-ti = ^sub-ii-la-ti, pi. olhib'ul/u, a Shaphel formation of
7X3 ; as such it has the same meaning as bdHiltu, pi. bdM&te. See H. W. B.
p. 162, and comp. bdHlat BH, 'das Reich des Bel,' as here. So also Hommel
(personal communication).
' The wife of Sargon I. is mentioned in R. A. iv. No. iii. pi. xviii. No. 52 :
PA lugal-sal, showing that even queens had their own officers !
' Naram-Siii, written {'^") Ma-ra-am-i'li') Sin, i.e. ' the beloved of Sin.'
His inscriptions (comp. also those of Sargon I.) :
iv. R. 34 iomind) ; Winckler, K. B. iii^ p. 107, col. ii. 1. 10 if.
i. R. 3, No. 7 ; Winckler, ibid. p. 98.
V. R. 64, i. 57, 60 : ' the building of the temple of Shamash in Sippar.'
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 171
from the inscriptions of Nabft-nd'id. He, like his father, was not
only a great conqueror, but also a great builder. He built — or
better continued to build — the temples at Nippur and Agade, and
even erected at his own expense the temple Ebarra to the sun-
god Shamash in Sippar. This is the temple which later on was
repaired by Nabfi-ni'id, and in which he found the ' tablet with the
writing of the name of Naram-Sin.' By the help of this discovery
we have been enabled to fix the date of Naram-Sin at 3750 b. c.
Only short inscriptions of this king have been found. The
longest, but unfortunately a badly mutilated inscription, is published
by Hilprecht in O. B. I. No. 120, and reads :
Col. I.
[{//») Na-r]a-am-['^" S]m Naram-Sin,
[Sarru da-LU~\M the mighty king,
king of Agade,
the one who is . .
Seal-cylinder, Hommel, Geschichte, p. 308 ; C. J. Ball, Light from the East,
p. 53 : Apil {dingir^ fstar (?), apil Ilu-ba-ni, arad (U") Na-ra-am-i'l") Sin.
D^c. pi. 44, fig. I ; comp. Henzey, R. A. iv. p. i. It reads:
(iVk) Na-ra-am-W") Sin Naram-Sin,
"iar (Jugal) king
ki-ib-ra-tim of the four
ar-ba-im corners of the world.
Rec. de Trav. xix. p. 187 (Thureau-Dangin).
Henzey, R. A. iv. 9 (with scene of Gilgamish legend).
Henzey, ibid. p. 1 1 {Lugaluiumgal).
Thnreau-Dangin, R. A. iv. No. iii. ; comp. Sargon I.
O. B. I. No. 4. It reads :
(ill) Na-ra-am-i'l") Sin
BA-GIM{bdni)
btt (il«) BH {En-lil).
O.B.I. No. 120; Scheil, Rec. de Trav. xv. 62-64; Maspero, Bawn of
Civilization, p. 601 f. ; Hilprecht, Recent Research in Bible Lands, pp. 87, 88.
Thureau-Dangin, Comptes Rendus, 1899, p. 348, pi. i (two inscriptions).
Inscriptions of Nabfl-na'id, passim.
172 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
Col. II.
(<va) EN-KI by Enki (Ea),
in hi-ib-ra-tim the guardian (?) of the four
ar-ha-im corners of the world,
NA-E the hero.
Col. III.
KISAL E-KALAM The foundation of the ' house of
the world '
u and
KI-GAL ' the great place'
il-pu-uk ' he has heaped up.
la duppa Whosoever this
sH-a tablet
\u\-sa-za-ku-ni shall destroy,
[('■'«) /Jter Ishtar and,
&c. . . .
10
\fsid-su\ his foundation
Col. IV.
li-zu-hu they may remove
« and
zera [&E-ZJR]-su his seed
li-il-gu-iu they may exterminate.
5 . . . . ni . . . .
' Root Upiku, H. W. B. 679.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 173
Noteworthy also are the words of Thureau-Dangin in R. A. iv.
p. 76 : 'Ze No. 38 nomme un certain ERIN-\I}A\ qui est qualifii
desclave de Bi-ga-ni-iar-ali : il est fort possible que ce Bi-ga-ni-
iar-ali soit identique au Bi-in-ga-ni-lar-ali, deja connu comme fils
de roi par un cachet publid par M, Menant, et qui, daprh une
empreinie encore inMite du Musie du Louvre ', aurait /// le propre fils
de Naram-Sin.'
The ' cachet ' above referred to is published by Hommel, Gesch.
p. 299, and reads: —
Bi-in-ga-ni4ar-dli O Binganisharali,
apil Sarri son of the king,
I-zi-lum Izilum
dup-sar the scribe
5 arad-ka {nita^-su) is thy servant.
That this inscription belongs to this period is unquestionable,
and if the empreinte encore in/dite du Musie du Louvre ' really shows
that a certain Binganisharali was the son of Naram-Sin, then we
can certainly identify him with the above-mentioned ' son of
the king.' Whether this Binganisharali followed his father upon
the throne of Agade is not evident from the inscriptions so far
published. This much, however, we do know, that Naram-Sin
had still another son, Nabe-?-mash, who was patesi of the city
of Tutu. Even the name of a granddaughter of his has come
down to us ; her name was Lipush-Iaum, i. e. ' May Jah (or Jahveh)
make.' The interesting inscription which gives us these latter two
names is published by Thureau-Dangin in Comptes Rendus, 1899,
p. 348, pi. I, and reads :
Mdr ('■'«) Na-ra-am-'f'"'^ Sin To the son of Naram-Sin
da-LUM the mighty,
' This ' empreinte ' is said to read, according to Thureau-Dangin (Comptes
Rendus, 1897, p. 190), as follows :
Naram-Sin, dieu d' Agade ;
Bingani-Sarali, ton fils :
Abi-i-sir, scribe, ton serviteur.
174 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
Na-U-?-mai viz. to Nabe-?-mash,
pa-te-si patesi
5 Tu-tu-f'' of Tutu,
Li-pu-ui-i-a-um (presents this) Lipush-Iaum,
DIMi/ydi the altar{?)-keeper
('■'») Sin of Sin
mdrahsu his daughter-
3. The third sign is not yet identified.
J. Comp. Wzi!?2>) 7i«-fe< = Mardulc, Br. 1082.
7. The first sign, which neither Amiand (T. C. 34) nor Thureau-Dangin
(E. C. 46) identified, occnrs again in the following passages : —
Gudea, Statue E, iv. 12 : X NIN-AN-DA-GAL-KI mu-na-gim t mag-na
mu-na-ni-gub\ here this X is that of a goddess, is made, and placed in a
temple.
Statue B, V. 3 : U^-KU-E X nu-gub ir nu-ta-tid-du, which ought to be
translated 'a kaM (;' Klagepriester") did not step to the X, and made no
lamentation.'
Cyl. B, xi. 1 : X-^ a-ni (shows that the sign in question has to end in G
(Old Sumerian) or M (New Sumerian)).
Ibid. XV. 21 : X ki-ag-ni uhim-gal kalam-ma SAG-ba-GIN-na.
Cyl. A, vi. 24 ; X ki-ag-ni uium-gal kalam-ma GIS-KU-DI mu-tug nin-
ad-gln-gin-ni.
Ibid. vii. 24 : X H-ag-e, &c., as before.
Ibid, xxviii. 17 : a-ga X a-bi GUD KA-NUN-DI.
I would like to identify therefore this sign with that of Br. 2737 : DIM —
only that we have here DIM-gunA. DIM= markasu, riksu ; comp. also
ii. R. 29, 62 a: DIM KUR-KUR-RA; Lyon Sarg. p. 72, No. 54: DIM-
GAL KALAM-MA with Gudea's DIM ki-ag-ni USUM-GAL KALAM-MA.
A DIM\hen would be something that is ' bound = joined together,' built, and
put up in a temple, i. e. it is an altar.
DI—'Bt. 9354 : 'ialdmu, and \\^ .^unversehrt erhalten, bewahren, H, W. B.
p. 664.
Z?/Af-Z'/= altar-keeper ; and the E DIM-AN-NA (Br. 2744) = ' the temple
of the heavenly altar.'
9. MSn-at-su (written DUMU-SAL-ZU) we have to read, and not mdrat-ka
(Thureau-Dangin), which latter had to be DUMU-SAL-ZA.
With the help of this inscription we can establish the following
genealogy : —
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 1 75
Sharganisharali
Naram-Sin
Binganisharali Nabe-?-mash, patesi of Ttitn
Lipush-Iaum, his daughter
Whether Binganishardli was followed by his sons or not, and
whether they were able to hold together the vast possessions they
had inherited, are at present questions still awaiting an answer.
In course of time, however, the successors of Binganishardli seem
to have lost their power — a new kingdom arose, that of Ur II.,
which latter, no doubt, followed upon that of Agade. Before we,
however, go over to the kings of Ur II., we have to direct our
attention to two other Semitic rulers in the extreme north of
Babylonia, viz. to Lasirab and Anubanini.
The Kings of Guti and Iiulubi.
To the same general period as that of Sargon I., i.e. about
3800 B.C., belong also the following two inscriptions, written in
the Semitic language :—
(i) That of Lasirab, king of the land of Guti*, on the east of the
lower Zdb ;
(2) That of Anubinini, king of Lulubi.
The former is published by Winckler in Z. A. iv. p. 406, and
translated and explained by Hilprecht in O. B. I. pp. 13 and 14,
note I. It reads : —
La-si ?-ra f-ab ? Lasirab {?),
da-LUM the mighty
iar king
Gu-ti-im of Guti,
5-10 missing ....
' See Delitzsch, Farad, pp. 'i'i'ir'^il-
176 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
ip-ui (f)-ma has made and
iddin presented (it).
la duppa Whosoever this
sH-a tablet
15 u-sa-za-ku-ni shall remove,
zikir lum-su and the mention of his name
i-sa-da-ru (= Hataru) shall write (upon it),
C'/a) Gu-ti-im Guti,
('■'«) liiar Ishtar,
20 ii and
('■'«) .y/w Sin
Hid-su his foundation
li-su-ha they may tear up,
»
and
25 zSra-su his seed
li-il-gu-da they may exterminate,
« and
harrdn alkai{^kat)-su whatsoever he undertakes (?)
a i-si-ir (= d hhir) may not prosper.
Although this inscription is short and badly mutilated, it is still
important, for it gives us valuable information in regard to the
country north of Babylonia, showing that about 3800 b.c. it was in
the hands of a Semitic population. Whether or no this inscription
should be placed before those of Sargon I. is hard to say. Seeing,
however, that Sargon I. and especially Naram-Sin extended their
domain to the furthest north, and that the former ruler actually took
captive Sharlak, the king of Gutim {h '^- Sar-la-ak lar Gu-ti-im-'''
ik-mi-ii) (see R. A. iv. iii. pi. v. No. 13), it is likely that these
kings of Guti preceded Sargon I., and that by him the kingdom of
Guti was overthrown.
The other inscription, viz. that of Anu-Binini', was found in
' Comp. now also Hommel in P. S. B. A., March, 1899, p. 115, who identi-
tifies this king with a certain An-ba-ni-ni mentioned in the ' Kuthaean legend
of the Creation' (see Scheil, R. T. xx. ; Notes d'Epigraphie, § xxxv ; Sayce,
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
177
Ser-i-Pul, and is called Stfele de Zohab (I.). It is published by
I. de Morgan and V. Scheil in Rec. de Tray. jciv. pp. 100-106.
According to the description there given, it is a ' slile d'un con-
quirant, Mevh en souvenir d!une vicioire comme Tindique la chalne de
capHfs que la d^esse Ninni {Istar) amene au rot Anu-BaninV. It is
written in two columns ; the last half of the second column, however,
is badly mutilated. It runs : —
Stfele de Zohab I.
Col. I.
An-nu-ha-ni-ni
sarru da-LUM
Har Lu-lu-be-^'-im
s\a-r\<X-am-'iu
5 h sa-lam C« ntar (JNNANNA)
i-na ia-du-im
Ba-ti-ir
ul-zi-iz
' la sa-al-mi'in
10 an-ni-in
a duppa su'alam {DUB BA-AM)
h-ia-za-ku
An-nu-um
ti An-nal{/)
15 ('!») BeHEN-LIL)
- ii (m Beitum (JVIN-LIL)
{.iiu) Rammdn {IM)
ii i'i«) mar {INN ANN A)
('■'«) Sin (EN-ZU)
Anu-Banini {' Anu is our be-
gettor'),
the mighty king,
king of Lulubi,
his image
and the image of Ishtar
in the mountain
Padir
has set up.
Whosoever this
image
and this tablet
shall remove,
Anu
and Anat
and Bgl,
and BSItu,
Ramman
and Ishtar,
Sin
P. S. B. A.. XX. p. Vi'j ; Zimmem, Z. A. xii; p. 317), where he add his seven
sons are said to have been overcome by an unnamed Babylonian king (a king;
of Agade?).
N
178 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
20 ii ('•'«) Manias {UTU) and Shamash,
lum
Col. II.
(//«) Nin
ii ('/a)
('•/«) En
TIL-NIN? ... kill . . .
5 . . . lu .
iiia and whosoever
ir-ra-mus shall destroy it (■/ D"iN,
H. W. B. 134),
li-ru-mus may he destroy him,
li-ru-ru-us (and) may he curse him (^^K,
H. W. B. 137),
I o si-ra-su ' and his seed
li-il-ku-t\u\ may he exterminate.
1 2 flF. The rest is too fragmentary to translate.
With Alusharshid, Sargon I., Lasirab, Anu-BSnini, we close the
first chapter in ancient Babylonian history. The Semites are now
not only in possession of the whole of Babylonia, but are also lords
of ' the four quarters of the world.' Even allowing for some un-
certainty as to whether Sargon I. ruled over Guti ^ and Lulubi, in the
north and north-east of Babylonia, the inscriptions of Lasirab and
Anu-Binini at any rate show that Semites held possession of the
extreme north. From this fact it has been argued that the Semites
invaded Babylonia from the north, but without reason. We have
seen that long before the time of Sargon I. — about five hundred
years — the dynasty of Ur-Nin^ was undoubtedly Semitic. Even
' For the interchange s and z in Vnlg. Babyl. eomp. Jiahu = halzu ; suluH =
zuluH; zu-ru-ui-iw^ina surri-iu (O. B. I. No. 84, i. 17).
' Comp. however above, p. 159 (f).
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 179
before Ur-Nini, we heard of a certain Lugalshuggur, patesi of
Shirpurla (Hilprecht's Lugal-kurum^zikum) and contemporary of
Mesilim, king of Kish. This patesi was declared to be a Semite
even by Hilprecht, and if he is a Semite, then also the whole dynasty
of which he was a member was Semitic, i. e. the whole dynasty
preceding Ur-Nini. Unfortunately we have no certain knowledge
in regard to the duration of this dynasty. Probably it reigned for
about two hundred years. This would give us a Semitic dynasty
reigning in Shirpurla at about 4500 b. c. It is not very probable
that the Semites, as soon as they invaded Babylonia, became kings
or patesis. It is more likely that they had to wait some time before
they could seize the sceptre of Shirpurla. Sumerian strength and
power had to be weakened first. In this case we might assume
a Semitic invasion at about 5000 b. c. This invasion, however,
probably came not from the north, but from the south.
Bearing in mind that we find Semites in Babylonia proper from
the oldest times — centuries before Sargon I. — we may with much
probability conceive of the course of events as follows : — The
Semites, having invaded Babylonia from the south, proceeded
further northward, till they found a suitable stopping'place. While
in Babylonia they adopted the civilization and Writing of the old
Sumerians, which they developed later on according to their own
ideas. Some of these Semitic hordes undoubtedly remained in
Babylonia, acquiring in course of time great influence and power.
The greater proportion of them, however, settled in the north.
For this reason, therefore, at about 3800 b. c. we find Semites all
over the north, with a language of their own, but which they
express by the Sumerian signs. This is the only reasonable
explanation. Or else how could the people of Lulubi and Guti,
of Agade and Kish, use a ' mode of writing ' which is undoubtedly
' Sumerian ^ ' ?
We even may go a step further. The Semites in Babylonia
' Comp. the following Sumerian forms in Semitic inscriptions : a-tnu-na-iub,
u-gal-ba, ba-gim, U-zir, sag-gii-ra-ni, mu-gim, idinglr) En-Hl, Sec, &c. The
form nam-ra-ag is probably not so much Sumerian as Elamitic.
N 2
l8o EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
adopted the Sumerian language wholly, with only a chance
Semitism here and there (comp. above). The Semites^i. e. of
Agade, Kish — who lived nearest to the Sumerians, used generally
the Semitic language, employing only now and then Sumerian
expressions (comp. note, p. 179), while the Semites living furthest
away from the Sumerians — Guti, Lulubi — wrote and spoke their
language with scarcely any '■ Sumerian admixture, still using, how-
ever, the Sumerian signs.
And if we iind in this purest Semitic language (Guti, Lulubi) one
or two traces of Sumerian grammar and nomenclature {se-zz'r), is
this not evidence enough that the ancestors of the people of Guti
and Lulubi lived for some time in Babylonia ?
On the other hand, if the ancestors of Guti and Lulubi came
from the nor^h, how could they possibly acquire that mode of writing
which at this time is only found in the valley between the Tigris
and the Euphrates ? But on the assumption that they came from
the south, they must have passed through Babylonia, and so have
come into contact with the Sumerians, whose writing they adopted.
And when they left the valley again, settling down in the north of
Babylonia, they took with them the Sumerian mode of writing, by
which they were enabled to express their own thoughts and feelings
on imperishable clay. The Semites came from the south '^.
. ' The names of the go^s, as EN-ZU, En-lil, Innanna, which occur in the
inscriptions of the kings of Guti and Lulubi are Sumerian, which their
ancestors adopted while in Babylonia, and identified them with their own
(Semitic) gods : Sin, BU, litar. The expressions da-L UM and BA-AM are
Semitic; For the former, see Jensen, Ki B. iii'. p. 116, note 5 ; for the latter,
see Hilprecht, Oj B. I. p. 14, note 5 : ' perhaps the two characters mnst be
transcribed " J«-fl»2." '
^ Hilprecht's argument in O. B. I. part ii. that the Semites came from
Marran rests on an erroneous identification of this city with Gishban ; see above,
p. 149, Lehmann also (Zwei Probleme, p. 180) thinks that the Semites came
from the north* The invading Semites, according to him, however, are those of
Kish ; while Hilprecht, as we saw, made Lugalzaggisi from Harran {gH-BAN-ki)
the first Semitic invader. Lehmann, as well as Hilprecht, failed to see that
all the rulers of Shirpurla were Semites who had adopted Sumerian speech
and government.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY l8l
The so-called later Patesis of Shirpurla.
Some 300 years after the time of Sargon I. and about 600 years
after that of Eannatum II. we hear of other patesis of Shirpurla,
headed by Ur-Ba'u. The period which lies between this ruler and
the last of the dynasty of Ur-Nini (see Chronological Table) is
the darkest in the history of Old Babylonia. Only now and then do
we hear of & patesi belonging to this period. The reason for this
probably is that the destinies of Babylonia, and especially Shirpurla,
were successively in the hands of the Semitic foes from the north
{sicY, beginning with Lugalzaggisi and ending with Naram-Sin.
Shirpurla, however, soon after the time of Naram-Sin seems to
have acquired new strength, culminating in the reign of Gudea.
Although this latter ruler seems to have wielded greater power than
perhaps any other ruler of Shirpurla, yet he, in conjunction with his
immediate predecessors and successors, only styles himself />«/«?■ of
that city. Many suggestions have been made as to the rulers who
exercised supreme sovereignty over Shirpurla. Nothing certain,
however, can be said on this point. The most probable view is
that the successors of the kings of Agade still continued to hold
sway over Shirpurla, as they did at the time of Lugalushumgal,
a predecessor of Ur-Ba'u, till they were dispossessed by the pre-
decessors of Ur-Gur and Dungi I. ', who were contemporary with
(Ga)Iukani I. and Gala-Lama.
The first of these later patesis is Ur-Ba'u '. Neither the name of
his father nor that of his son is known to us. All his inscrip^
' Distinguish between assimilated Semites in Babylonia proper and Semites
who left Babylonia, settling down in the north and attacking their ' degraded '
brethren in the souths
* At the time of Naram-Sin there were in Ur only patesis. These patesis in
course of time probably succeeded those of Agade in power.
' Means ' servant of Ba'u ' {Kalbi-Ba^u). For Ba'u and her relation to the
other gods, see Jensen, K. B. iii '. p. 30, note ff. His inscriptions are :
l82 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
tions are entirely occupied with a record of the building of diiferent
temples in honour of his most favoured gods ' ; they do not re-
count a single campaign. Everything seems to be peaceful. He
lived, as Hommel, Gesch. p. 317, says, ' als ein friedlicher Priester-
konig, dem Kultus seiner G'dtler und Erhaltung ihrer HeiliglUmer'.
Here follow some of his inscriptions :
Ddc. pi. 27, No. 2.
{dingir) EN-KI For Enki,
lugal-a-ni his king,
UR.i.dingir) Ba-u Ur-Ba'u
pa-le-si patesi
5 Sir-pur-la-^i of Shirpurla,
dumu tu-da a son brought up
(AV,y) Nin-a-gal-ka-ge by Ninagal,
e-a-ni his house
viu-na-ru he has built.
Dec. pi. 7, Nos. I and 3, pi. 8 : Amiaud, ibid, iv ; A. B. K. p. z, No. 5 ;
Jensen, K. B. iii'. p. 18.
Dec. pi. 26, No. 1 a, b: Amiaud, ibid, xxxi ; Jensen, 1. u. p. 24, ii.
Comp. Hilprecht, O. B. I. p. 263, note 4.
Dec. pi. 27, No. 2 : Amiaud, ibid. xxxi.
Dec. pi. 37, Nos. I and 2 : Amiaud, ibid, xxxi {briques).
Dec. p]. 38, 2 {Cdne).
' Among these gods are to be found —
(dingir) Im-gig{mi)-gu-bar-bar (i. e. Ningirsu or the later Ninib), for whom
he built the Eninnfl (the temple of the number 50) ; see Jensen, K. B. iii '.
p. 23, note *-|",
Nin-Jjar-sag (i.e. mistress of the mountains ; cp. Jensen, Cosmologie, p. 207) ,
the later Belit. For her he erects a temple in Girsu. For Ba'u he builds a
temple in Umazag ; in another suburb of Girsu, viz. Erim, he erects a temple in
honour of Innanna (the later Ishtar) ; for EN-KI, the ' king of Erech,' a temple
in Girsu ; also Nindara and Ninagal are not forgotten. For Nin-MarM (j, e.
mistress of Mar) he erects the Ei-gu-Uir; and for Dumuzizuab (son of Ea),
the nin Ki-nu-nir-ki (i. e. the lord of Borsippa), a temple in Girsu. See,
in general, Jensen, K. B. iii '. p. 18 ff.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 183
Inscription on the ^ briques' ; Ddc. 37, No. i
(No, 2 has the same legend).
{dingir) Nin-gtr-su For Ningirsu,
gud-lig-ga the mighty hero
[dingir) En-m-la{l^-ra of Enlil,
jJrJ4ingir-) Ba-u Ur-Bau
pa-te-si patesi
Sir-pur-la-t'-ge of Shirpuria
e-a-ni his house
mu~na~ru he has built.
Dec. pi. 38, 2 (C6ne).
Col. I.
^{dingir) ^Slin-gir-su] For Ningirsu,
gud-lig-ga the mighty hero
(dingir) En-Ul-la(J)-ra of Enlil,
Ur-idingir) Ba-u Ur-Ba'u
pa-te-si patesi
[Sir-pur-la-^'-ge] of Shirpuria
Col. II.
(dingir) Ipi-gig-^u-bar-bar the temple of Imgiggubarbar
mu-na-ru he has built
ki-bi mu-na-gi and restored it (to its place).
i84
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
E. A. H. 112 (C^ne).
# l^ip
'^"4=^-^
10
^^^i>
•^-x^^'
12
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
185
E. A. H. ri2, 113.
{C^nes of Vr-Bei'u.)
The inscription of both of these C^nes is identical, and reads :
10
(rfjK^y) JSfin-gir-su
gud-lig-ga
{dingir) En'lil-la(tYra
lJr.{,dingir) Sa-u
pa-te-si
Sir-pur-la-'''
dumu tu-da
{diHgir) Nin-a-gal-korge
nin-du-e pa-mu-na-ud-du
E-ninnU (*»^»') Im-gig-'gU'
har-har-ra-ni
For Ningirsu,
the mighty hero
ofB61,
Ur-Ba'u
the patesi
of Shirpurla,
a son begotten
by Ninagal,
he completed the proper thing ;
his temple Eninnfi-Imgiggu-
barbar
he has built
and restored to its place.
This god, according to ii. R. 58, 58 =
mu-na-ru
ki-bi mu-na-gl
7. TV=alddu 'h\, Br. 1070.
8. Nin-h-gal— ' lord of great power."
Ea, the god of smithery,
9. NIj^-DU-E; for Z7Z = Z) f comp. Z. A. ii. 83. For the whole expres-
sion, comp. Jensen, K. B. iii '. p. 33, notes *" and **". Jensen, 1. c, translates i
'vollendete er {eiivas) das GMrige{s) (Geziemende).
10. £:-ntnnii = ' the temple of the number 50,' 50, according to v. R. 37, 18
= Ninib, hence Ningirsu, the later Ninib ; as such he is ' {dingir^ Im-gig-^-
bar-bar^ i. e. the god {dingir') who may (^«) illuminate {bar-bar) the dark {gig)
heaven {ini), a name which identifies Ningirsu-Ninib with the ' early sun.'
For a fuller account of the building of his temple, comp. D^c. pi. 7 and 8, and
Jensen, K. B. iii'. p. 19 ff. This temple later on was rebuilt and restored by
Gudea (comp. E. A. H. 114, 115). According to Statue B, v. i8 if., he also
' iag-ba gi-gunu ki-ag-ni {Sim) drin-na mu-na-ni-ru,' i. e. built in its midst
a Gigunu (Jensen, ' Dunhelgemach '), which he loves, out of cedar-wood.
Whether the next patesi, Namma^m'^, followed, immediately
upon Ur-Ba'u or not, is not evident from the inscriptions. On
' This name has been misread for a long time. Ledrain first read it JVaiu-
lugh-ni and then Nam-kin-ni. Hommel (Zeitschrift fiir Keilschriftforschung,
ii. p. 184, and Geschichte, p. 298) read it Nam-uru{?)-ni, The name.
l86 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
p. 1 9 we saw that he married ' the lady Kandu,' ' a child of
Ur-Ba'u'; hence he must have ruled very soon after Ur-Ba'u.
We shall not be very far from the truth if we suppose that the
immediate successor of Ur-Ba'u was his oldest son, who probably
died childless, and that he was succeeded by Nammagni on the
throne of Shirpurla. His inscriptions, like those of Ur-Ba'u, are
confined to building records, and give us no information about the
history of his time. Whether or not he was succeeded by his son,
we do not know. From an inscription recently published in C. T.
i. No. 96-6-15, I, it is, however, evident that he must have had a
son, for ' his glorious granddaughter ' {dumu-ka azag-gi), Ninkagina
by name, dedicates a tablet for the life of Nammagni, the patesi
of Shirpurla. The whole tablet reads :
(dingir) Urdu-zi To Urduzi,
lugal-a-ni her king,
nam-ti for the life
Nam-mag-ni of Nammagni,
5 pa-ie-st the patesi
Sir-pur-la-^'-ka-ku of Shirpurla,
Nin-ka-gi-na Ninkagina,
dumu-ka azag-ge (his)glorious granddaughter (child),
sh nam-H-la-ni-ku and for her own life,
I. Urdu or Uri is the sign BUR-BUR, Br. 7304.
7. With Nin-ka-gi-na, ' the lady of the true month,' comp. Uru-ka-gi-na. .
S. dumu-ka. Comp. above, p. 13, note i, and Tablette A of Entemena, note
to ii. 2. This line hardly contains the name of the father {dumu KA-AZAG-
GE) of Ninkagiha.
9. M = Semitism.
according to Jensen, K. B. iii'. p. 69, note 11, means: ' Seine Erhabenheil'
{slrAtisu).
His inscriptions are :
Dec. pi. 27, I ; A. B. K. p. 2, No. 6 ; Jensen, K. B. iii '. p. 69, 8.
Dec. pi. 37, 10 {brique) : (i) Nam-mag-ni, {2) patesi, (3) Sirpirla-''' .
Heuzey, R. A. ii, 79, and Jensen, 1. c, p. 74 (inscript. of nin Kan-du).
Comp. also Heuzey, R. Arch. 1886, pi. vii. No. 4; ibid. p. 203 ; Ledrain,
Rev. Crit. 1883, ii. 220; and above, p. ig.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 187
'10 a-mu-na-sub has presented it.
GA G- GI&-ha This (?^ G- GIS ( = masse d'armes) :
lugal-mu ba-zig-gi ' My king, look favourably !
^e-ma-da-zig-sig oh ! may he look favourably upon it '
mu-bi is its name.
11. For GAG-GIS, comp. Inscription of Dudu, Die. s'''^, No. 2, and Hil-
precht, O. B. I., p. 253, note i.
12. zig-gi, Br. 2325 : nasii, here in the sense of nasii ia ini, 'to look
favourably upon,' H. W. B. p. 484. LI. 12, 13 contain the name of the GAG-
GIS (^ Schlachtkeule'). For other names, comp. R. A. ii. 79, gff. : bur-ba,
lugal-mu, nam-ti-mu, ge-sud mu\^bi\ (sic; see K. B. iii'. p. 76) ; iv. R^ 35,
2, gff. : (f«W3 (does not belong to ?«M-«a-^'«, against Winckler, K. B. iii'.
p. 83, 8) lugal-mu gl! ? "iag iag-ga-ka-ni, ga-an-ti-il, mu-bi; i. R. 5, No. xvi.
col. ii. gff. : bad-ba Nannar siig ma-da-ge en-gi-en, mu-bi-im, (K. B. iii'. p. 94, 2) ;
Gudea, Statue A, iii. 4 ff. ; nin an-ki-a natn-tar-ri-ne , (ditigir) JSfin-tu, am dingir-
ri-ne-ge, Gu-de-a, (gd)lu e-ru-a-ka, nam-ti-la-ni mu-sud, mu-ku mu-na-sa ;
B, vii. 14 ff. : lugal-mu, e-a-ni, mu-na-ru, nam-ti nin-ba-mu, mu-ku mu-na-sa ;
C, iii. 18 ff. : Gu-de-a, (ga)lu e-ru-a-ka, nam-H-la-ni ge-sud, mu-ku mu-na-sa;
D, V. I ff. : lugal h-dugud-da-ni, kur-e nu-il-e, (rf'V iV) Nin-gir-su-ge, Gu-de-a,
{gd)lu e-ru-a-ka, nam-dug mu-ni-tar, mu-ku mit-na-sa ; E, ix. i ff. ; nin-mu
ba-zig-gi, nam-ti ba, tid sag gab zal-eal (sic), mu-ku mu-na-sa ; H, iii. i ff. ;
nin dumu ki-ag an-azag-ga-ge, am i.dingir) Ba-u, E-sil-gid-gid-ta, Gu-de-a, nam-
ti mu-na-sum, mu-kti mu-na-sa.
This inscription testifies strongly in favour of Hommel's argu-
ment that we have to supply a gap of about 200 years between
Ur-Ba'u and Gudea (see p. 19), during which time the successors
of Nammagni may have reigned in Shirpurla.
Passing therefore over an interval of several generations, we reach
the greatest of these later patesis of Shirpurla.
This patesi is Gudea '■ (at about 3400 b. c). He must have
' Gudea is rendered into Assyrian (comp. bilingual texts of Hammurabi) by
N&biu, 'preacher'; see Jensen, K. B. iii^ p. 26, note 3.
His inscriptions are :
Statues :
A. Die. pi. 20 and 15, 6 ; Amiaud, ibid. p. vi; A. B. K. p. 3, No. 7 ; and
Z. K. i. p. 233.
B. Dec. pi. 16-ig ; Amiaud, ibid. p. vii ; A. B. K. p. 5, No. 12 ; Jensen,
K. B. iii'. p, 26 ff.
C. Dec. pi. 10 and 13, i ; Amiaud, ibid. p. xvi. Comp. Hommel, Semi-
l88 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
been a usurper and the founder of a new dynasty ^ for in no
tische Sprachen und Volker, p. 40 ; Amiaud, Zeitschrift fiir Keilschriftforschung,
i. 156.
D. Die. pi. 9; Amiaud, ibid. p. xvii ; Jensen, 1. c, p. 50,
E. Dec. pi. II and 13, 2; Amiaud, ibid. p. xix.
F. D&. pi. 14 and 15, 4; Amiaud, ibid. p. xxiii; Jensen, I. c, p. 55.
G. Dec. pi. 13, 3 ; Amiaud, ibid. p. xxv, and Z. A. iii, 23 ff. ; Jensen, 1, u., p. 58.
H. Dec. 13, 4; Amiand, Z. A. ii. 287.
' Votive tablets : '
(a) Dec. 29, 2, has the same text as Dec. 27, 3. See Amiaud, ibid. p. xxxi.
(i8) {inidite) ; Amiaud, ibid. p. xxxi.
(7) (inidite) ; Amiaud, ibid. p. xxxii.
(8) D&. 29, I ; Amiaud, ibid. p. xxxii; A. B. K. p- 4, No. 10.
Bricks :
(a) {inidite); Amiaud, ibid.
(/3) Dec. 37, 6 ; Amiaud, ibid.
(7) Dec. 37, 7 ; Amiaud, ibid.
(5) {inidite) ; Amiand, ibid.
(e) Die. 37, 3 ; Amiaud, ibid.
(f) Dec. 37, 4 ; Amiaud, ibid.
(17) (^inidite) ; Amiaud, ibid.
(9) Die. 37, 5 ; Amiaud, ibid,
(i) (inidite) ; Amiaud, ibid.
P. S. B. A., Nov. 4, 1890, p. 62.
Other inscriptions :
Dee. 26, 2 (vase : Gudea presents it ' for his life ').
Dec. 26, 4 ; K. B. iii'. p. 66, ii. (Lugaldur-).
Die. 26, 7, 9 (fragments).
Dee. 25'''', I ; comp. Revue Archeol. 1891, 3"" serie, xvii. p. 153 (Heuzey).
Dec. 44, 2 (vase h libation).
Clercq, ii. pi. viii. 2 (C6ne),
Dec. 38, I, 3, 6, 7.
Dee. 24, 2, 3.
Minant, Catalogue des Cyl., &c., p. 59 ; Hommel, Z. A. i. 439 f. ; Jensen,
K. B. iiii. p. 65 e; A. B. K. p. 3, No. 8.
Die. 2 2'''s, 3*.
A. B. K. p. 4, No. II a,b.
R. T. xxi. p. 26 ff., No. xlii. : Scheil, Gudea sur les cylindres cachets.
Cylinders :
A. Die. pi. 33, 34, 35 ; Zimmem, Z. A. iii. p. 2J3.
B. Die. pi. 36; Amiaud, R. A. ii. p. 124 and iii. p. 42 (col. xii. 15 to end),
transcribed into Assyrian characters. Both these cylinders are now published
again by Ira M. Price, in the Assyriologische Bibliothek, vol. xv.
' This has already been maintained by Hommelj Geschlchte, p. 320. The
Early Babylonian history 189
inscription — as far as th^y are known to us — does he give his
genealogy ^
We have seen that a certain Naminagni, in consequence of his
marriage with the nin Kan-du, a daughter of Ur-Ba'u, became
patesi of Shirpurla. The successors of Nammagni — with whom
appears to begin a new line of rulers — probably reigned during
several generations, till they were overthrown by Gudea. This
fact would also account for the difference in the writing as exhibited
in the inscriptions of Ur-Ba'u and Gudea respectively (see p. 19).
Gudea — powerful as he was — however, seems to have acquired his
greatness not so much by leading the armies of Shirpurla against
his enemies, as by peaceful commercial intercourse with the neigh-
bouring countries and by erecting a number of temples for his
gods — temples distinguished by beauty and magnificence. In this
latter work the gods themselves were his inspirers. An old man
{(ga)lu I a-an) appeared to him in a MA-MU (' vision ') and com-
manded him to build a temple : ' To build his house he commanded
me ' (Cyl. A, iv. 20). Seeing that he did not know who this man
was, the goddess Nind informs him : ' My brother the god Ningirsu
is this (sc. man). To build his abode, the temple Eninnu, he com-
mands thee* (v. 17 f.). Thereupon the goddess Nidaba, the sister
of NinS., furnished with the stilus and writing tablet of Ba'u, was
presented to him. She — called here {sal i a-Mi, i. e'. a) woman
(iv. 23 ffi), or also (KI-EL, i. e.) girl (v. 22-26) — makes a drawing in
his presence, and puts before him the complete model of the
temple Eninnfl, i. e. ' the temple of the number 50.'
Gudea — 'the mu-gil-sa (Jensen, Schatzspender), patesi of Shirpurla,
the shepherd, chosen by the true heart of Ningirsu, who was
favourably looked upon by the faithful eye of Nin^, to whom power
passage (Cyl. A. iii. 6) on which Hommel based his argument must not
be translated : ' eine Mutter hatte ich nicht' ' einen Vater hatte ich nicht^
but just the opposite : ' thou art my mother,' ' thou art my father.' See Zim-
mern, Z. A. iii. p. 234.
' Consequently he was not the son of Ur-Ba'u ; Maspero, Dawn of Civiliza-
tion, p. 610.
igo EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
was given by Nindara,a child begotten by Gatumdug, to whom a great
dominion and a sublime sceptre were given by Galalim, who was
destined by Dunshagga to have courage (life) in his heart and to be
of great power, who was triumphantly led into battle by Ningishzidda,
his king' (Statue B, ii. 4-iii. 5) — obeys gladly, begins to build this
temple, and makes it ' like Erech a holy place ' (B, iv. 7).
The building materials for this temple are derived from the most
distant countries. From the Amanus mountain (in North- Western
Syria) he gets cedar- wood ; from the mountain Ibla (= Lebanon ?),
zabanu-trees and cedars ; from Kasalla \ a mountain of the ' West-
land^,' he brings great quarried stones; from another mountain of the
' West-land,' Tidanum^ he gets shirgal-stones. KA-GAL-AD-'''*,
a mountain of Kimash °, furnishes copper ; the mountain of Barsip
(near Carchemish), nalua-stone. From the land Meluhha" are
derived ushu-wood, gold, precious stones, and iron ; from Gagum ',
gold-dust ; from Magan ', dolerite. To sum up in his own words :
' In the power of NinS and in the power of Ningirsu for Gudea,
to whom a sceptre was given by Ningirsu, have Magan, Meluhha,
' Comp. Omen of Sargon I. Jensen reads this name Sub{mu)-sal{-gal)-!a,
K. B. iii\ p. 34, vi. 5. See Hommel, Gesch. p. 306 ; iv. R^ 36, No. 1, col. ii.
23; E. A. H. 134, 22 ; Dungi III., dates. No. 13.
^ Martu, i. e. the country of the Amorites, whence we get Amurril = ' Araor-
tes' and 'western.' Delitzsch, Parad., ' Fiir die Lander an der Mittelmeer-
kilste, besonders also fiir PhSnizien iind Paldstina, hatten die Assyrer . . ,
eine sfecielle Bezeichnung, ndmlich Westland {Mar-tu)' p. 271. For the
pronunciation of Mar'tti->" = AmurrH, see Hommel, P. S. B. A., 1896,
p. 17.
^ i.e. Dedan, close to Moab ; Hommel, Ancient H. Trad. p. 34.
' i.e. Assyrian abullu-abisu (ii. R. 52, 55), 'the gate of his ancestor'
(sc. Nimrod). Is identified by Hommel, A. H. T. p. 35, with the two moun-
tains Aga and Salma.
° ' Die grosse syrisch-arabische WUste, sfeciell nun, ■Welche die Siid- und Siid-
westgrenze des Euphrat- und Tigrisgebietes bildet . . . heisst mdt MASH^
Delitzsch, Parad. p. 242. Comp. also the ninth canto of the Gilgamish legend,
and Z. A. vi. p. 161 (mentioned there on a cylinder).
° i.e. North-Western Arabia; comp. also Jensen, K. B. iii'. p. 53, note *•'.
' A mountainous district near Medina.
° i. e. Eastern Arabia.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY igx
Gubin ^, and the land Tilmun ^, each of which possesses every
kind of tree, brought to Shirpurla ships (laden) with wood for his
buildings ' (Statue D, iv. 2-1 a).
Not only, however, did he get stones for his temples, but also for
his battle-clubs {masse d'armes), called GAG-GIS, as may be
seen from an inscription published D^c. 2^^^S 1 b. Comp.
Heuzey, Revue Arch. 1891, vol. xvii. p. 153, where we read:
{dintrir) Nin-gir-su Unto Ningirsu,
gud'lig-ga the mighty hero
(dingir) En4il-\ld\ of BSl,
lugaha-ni his king,
5- Gu-^e-d\ Gudea^
^ \pa-te-st\ patesi
Sir-pur-la-J'' of Shirpurla,
^ar-sag UR-IN-Gi uru Az M from the mountain UR-IN-Gi
of the city of Az,
a-ab-ba igi-nim-ka on the upper sea,
10 (««) SIR'GAL shirgal-stones
mu-su ?-ib {f)-lal (f)'a having fetched
im-ia-DUL-DU and brought down ,
GA G-GI^ gud-III'ku and to a GA G-GlS gud-III
8. For Ai, see above, p. 88, 12.
9. The upper sea = the Mediterranean Sea, see Lugalzag. ii. 9. A% therefore
has to be sought for In that neighbourhood.
13. Comp. Statue B, vi. 31, 36, and Cyl. 3 xiii. 21.
Such battle-clubs must have been richly adorned. Not only stones furnished
the material for them, but also copper, gold-dust, and KIL-ZA-NIM (see
Statue B,vi. 21 ff.).
' ' Westlich von Babylon, vielleicht ein Theil Von Arabien,' Jensen, K, B.
iii ', p. 53, note **t. Amiaud, on the other hand, identifies Gubin with Koptos,
near Thebes, in Upper Egypt. From this place Gudea gets galup-trees ; these
trees then would be the Persea or Lebbakh, which is found growing in Egypt,
and is now called by the Syrians 'khalApa' (Hommel, A. H. T. p. 35).
' On the Persian Gulf. Was identified with Tylos, one of the Bahrein
islands, Jensen, K. B. iii '. p. 53, note f *.
192 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
mu-na-gim having made it,
15 [a\-mu-na-sub - he presented it.
The fact that so many different countries are mentioned in the
inscriptions of Gudea ^ throws a bright light upon the civiHzation
of this period, and furiiishes us with welcome information as to
the extent of this ruler's dominion or influence. It required no
ordinary civilization to quarry stones and cut cedars in siich remote
countries, and transport them, either on ships or on the back of
camels, over these vast distances.
Let us now take a glance at our map and see how wide an extent
of country was either actually subject to Gudea, or by alliance
accessible to his ships and caravans. This area stretched westward
far beyond the Arabian Desert, as far as the Lebanon, the Dead
Sea, and probably to Koptos in Egypt. Northwards it went far
beyond Borsippa, even to the mountains which separate the valley
of the Upper Tigris from that of the Euphrates. In the south it
extended over the greater part of Southern Arabia, even into
the Persian Gulf to the island of Tylos. In the east the whole
of Elam was subject to him. No wonder that he could say, like
old Lugalzaggisi, ' Ningirsu, his beloved king, from the upper sea
even to the lower sea (i. e. from the Mediterranean even to the
Persian Gulf) has opened his way ' (B, v. 23-27).
If Gudea actually ruled over all these lands, it appears strange
that in all his extant inscriptions we have no mention of his wars.
One exception to this is a notice in B, vi. 64-69, of an expedition
against Elam : ' The weapons of the city of Ansham in Elam he
put down, its nam-ra-ag (i.e. prince) he brought to Ningirsu of
Eninnfi.'
Humble and pious as he was, he did not care to emphasize his
worldly achievements, but was satisfied to live wholly for his gods ;
for he not only built the Eninnfl for Ningirsu, but also temples for
the other gods.
' Especially in Statue B.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 193
^^^- 37i 3 {briqut) : cotop. P. S. B. A. Nov. 1890, p. 63, No. ii.
Col. I.
{ditiffir) ]Sfind For Nini,
m'n-en the lady mistress,
nin-in-dub-ba the mistress of the art of writing,
nin-a-ni his mistress,
5 Gu-de-a Gudea,
pa-te-si patesi
Sir-pur-la-^'-ge of Shirpurla,
Col. II.
nin-du-e pa-mu-na-ud-du completed what was proper.
Nind-'^' uru ki-ag-ga-ni-a In Nina, her beloved city,
E-ud-mh-Nind-^'-tag her temple Udma-NinStag,
KUR-E-ta il-la-ni which from the KUR-E arises,
5 mu-na-ru he built.
I. 3. See Jensen, K. B. iii^ p. 47, note f-
II. 3. Comp. Br. 7854.
4. il, Br. 6146, el-A, ruHA, iakA.
In P. S. B. A. Nov. 1890, p. 63, No. ii., this inscription goes on :
ki-bi niu-na-^ and restored it to its place ;
md-mag-ni her ' great ship '
. . . mu-na-ru he has built.
Ddc. 37, 4 {brt'que).
(dingir) JSfin-dar '-a To Nindara,
lugal-en the king,
lugal-a-ni his king,
Gu-de^a Gudea,
5 pa-te-si patesi
&ir-pur-la-l^'-ge of Shirpurla,
E Gir-su-J''-ka-ni his house in Girsu
mu-na-ru he has built.
' Also read Nin-si-a, Jensen, K. B. iii^. p. 24, note i.
194
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
The shorter inscriptions of Gudea, recording the building of the
temple of Ningirsu, generally run : —
E. A. H. 114.
(C6ne.)
>^^^
'^MWTW
^
^4^0- Mf'
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 195
E. A. H. 1 14, 115 (comp. D^c. 37, 3, and A. B. K. p. 4, No. 10).
E. A. H. 114 is a c^ne, and No. 115 is a small tablet of dolerite
((»«) KAL) which Gudea brought from the mountain of Magan
{kur-Ma-gatt-^'-ta im-ta-dul-du). The inscription is the same on
both, and reads : —
(dingtr) Nin-gir-su For Ningirsu,
gud lig-ga the mighty hero
(dingir) En-lil-la(l)-ra of B61,
Gu-de-a Gudea,
5 pa-ie-si patesi
Sir-pur-la-^'-ge of Shirpurla,
nin-du-e pa-mu-na-ud-du he completed the proper thing,
E-ninnd ('''«^'') Im-gig-^u-lar- his temple Eninnfi^Imgiggubarbar
bar-ra-ni
mu-na-ru he has built
I o hi-hi mu-na-gi and restored to its place.
7. See note to E. A. H. 11 3, 1. 9.
8. See ibid, note 10.
In Other inscriptions, see e.g. D^c. 38, i, 3, 6, he adds to the
preceding : —
lag-la {h'm) erin In its midst, out of cedar-wood,
ki-di-kud-a-ni his judgement-place
mu-na'Tii-ru he has built.
This judgement-place he called, as we know from B, v. j8,gi-
unu{g) (Jensen, Dunkelgemach, K. B. iii*. p. 33, note +*, and Kos-
mologie, Index. Compare, however, Hommel, Die Astron. der alten
Chaldaer(Ausland, 1 891/2), who takes it to mean ' Begrahnisplaiz.'
He, like Urukagina, built also a ki^akkil for Dunshagga.
D^C. 29, I ; A. B. K. p. 4, No. 9.
(Dtngir) Buti-lag-ga For Dunshagga,
dumu ki'Og the beloved son
{dingir) Niti-gtr-su-ka of Nifigirsu,
196 lEARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
lugal-a-ni his king,
Gu-de-a Gudea,
pa-te-si patesi
&ir-pur-la-'''-ge of Shirpurla,
E ki-akkil-li-ni his temple Ki-akkil
mu-na-ru he has built.
To the same god he also dedicated some kind of a vase ' for (the
preservation of) his life.'
Ddc. 26, 2.
(Dingir) Dun-lag-ga To Dunshagga,
dumu ki-ag the beloved son
(dingtr) Nin-gir-su-ka of Ningirsu,
lugal-a-ni his king,
5 Gu-de-a Gudea,
pa-te-si patesi
^ir-pur-la-J^'-ge of Shirpurla,
nam-ti-la-ni-ku for his life
a-mu-na-lub he presented it.
Among other dedications has been found a splendid 'vase h
libation ' of stone, D^c. 44, 2, with this inscription :
(Dinirir) Nin-gis-zid-da To Ningishzidda,
dingir-ra-ni his god,
Gu-de-a Gudea,
pa-te-si patesi
5 Sir-pur-la-'^'-ge of Shirpurla.
The temples which Gudea built and so beautifully decorated, and
which were his delight probably for many years, are to-day mere
heaps of stones. Yet the statues, his ' doubles,' which he placed in
those different sanctuaries are still preserved. Eight of such
statues have come down to us, and are now in the Louvre. In
some of these he is represented as ' sitting,' in others as ' standing.'
' The legs brought together, the bust rising squarely from the hips,
the hands crossed upon the breast — the right hand always being
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 197
put into the left — a posture of submission or respectful adoration.
The mantle passes over the left shoulder, leaving the right free, and
is fastened on the right breast ^.' All these statues have lost their
heads. Some of these heads, however, have been recovered. They
are completely shaven, and often surmounted by a kind of turban.
Six of these statues have special names ^- From the inscriptions
VI& also learn in what temple these statues have been placed, from
what material they were made, and in whose honour they were
erected. In some cases Gudea went even so far as to prescribe
that certain sacrifices should be offered to this his ' double ' : —
r ga of drink.
I ga of food.
\ ga of flour.
\ ga nin-^ur-ra al-an' (Statue B, i. 8-1 1). So it then hap-
pened that at the time of Ur IV, the statues came to be
looked upon as gods, and Gudea — who never called himself
(dingir) Qu-de-a — became ' god Gudea.' See suh Ur IV.
The inscriptions in some cases conclude with an invocation of
the curse of the gods upon eyery one who either shall remove the
statue or shall blot out the writing upon it. Four (B, D, F, G) of
these statues have been translated by Jensen in K. B. iii '.p. 26 ff.
The others I add for the sake of completeness.
Statue A.
Cartouche.
Gu-de-a Gudea,
pa-te-si patesi
Sir-pur-la-^' of Shirpurla,
{ga)lu E-ninnii who the Eninnfi
5 {dingir ]}^in-gir-su-ka of Ningirsu
in-ru-a. has built.
' Maspero, Dawn of Civilization, p. 613.
' Statues F and G have no names. In the latter the space for the name
was left free to be filled up at some future time.
' For nin-gur-ra comp. Br. 12123, H. W. B. 626; ripsu; a/ rap&su,
' dreschen, schlagen, zerschlagen' ; aJ-(7«=Neo-Babyl. <rf-a-a« = barley ; henc
we may see in nin-^w-ra ai-an ' crushed barley.'
igS EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
Col. I. ■
(dingir) Nin-har-sog For Ninharsag,
nin uru da-sar-a the mistress, who looks favour-
ably upon the city,
am-tur-tur-ne the mother of the children,
nin-a-ni his mistress,
5 Gu-de-a Gudea,
pa-te-si patesi
Str-pur^la-^'-ge of Shirpurla,
e uru Gi'r-su-^'-ka-ni her temple of the city, of Girsu
mu-7ia-ru he has built,
Col. ir.
DUP-PISAN azag-ga-m her holy (bright) DUP-PISAN
mu-na-gim he has made,
Uii^) DUR-GAR mag nam- the sublime throne of her
nin-ka-ni ladyship
niu-na-gim he has made,
5 e mag-ni a-mu-na-ni-tur into her great temple he has
brought it (them).
kur Ma-gan-^'-ta From the mountain of Magan
I. 2. SAR, Br. 4314 : kar&bu, H. W. B. 350.
3. ' Mother of the children,' sc. of this world = inhabitants.
II. I. ¥oT PISAN, see T. C. 93, 99, 135, and E. C. 429 = 6^6007. As such
it has the pronunciation ALAL, H. W. B. 476 ; PISAN, H. W. B. 532 ;
DUBBISAG—dup'iarru, S'. 238. Comp. also Sayce, Transactions of the
Society of Bibl. Arch. i. part ii. 1872, and Hommel, P. S. B. A. Jan. 1893,
vol. XV. p. Ill, and S. L. No. 232. Sayce took P/^.^jV= papyrus ; Hommel
identified it with Aeg. mj}, the picture of the writing-utensils. The sign occurs
again Statues B, v. 41, 43 ; F, iv. 8 ; T, iii. 10. Amiaud, Z. A. i. p. 247, translates
D UP-PISAN by ' libatoirs ' (mot & mot : libation-vases), ou peut-Hre mieux
V' autel' {la table sur laquelle on plafait les vases destines aux sacrifices').
Jensen renders it by ' Opferbecken' (?), see K. B. iii ^. p. 57, note ft*-
3. (gii) DUR-GAR. See Br. 10663 : kussA.
5. TUR — ^. C. 145. Whenever this sign is used it has the value TUR,
and means erlbu, ' to enter ' ; here =- Shaphel, to make to enter = ' to bring
(into).'
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
199
Col. III.
(««) KAL im-ia-DVL-DU
dolerite he has brought,
(Br. 9594)
alan-na-ni-ku
into his statue
mu-tu
he has formed it.
nin an-ki-a nam-tar-ri-nt
' Oh, mistress that decrees the
fates of heaven and earth,
Wngir) Nin-tu
oh, Nintu,
am dingir-ri-ne-ge
mother of the gods,
Gu-de-a
of Gudea,
Col.
IV.
{ga)lu e-ru-a-ka
who the temple has built 1
nam-ii-la-ni mu-sud
his life prolong ! '
mu-ku mu-na-sa
he called its name.
e a-mu-na-ni-lur
into the temple he brought it.
Statue C.
Col,
I.
(Dingir) Nin-gii-zid-da
The god Ningishzidda
dingir Gu-de-a
is the god of Gudea,
pa-test
the patesi
&ir-pur-la-^i
of Shirpurla,
{ga)lu E-an-na
who the Eanna
in-ru-a-ham
has built.
Col.
II.
(dingir) Innanna
For Innanna,
nin kur-kur-ra
the mistress of the lands,
nin-a-m
his mistress,
III. 3. TU, when written thus (E. C. 147), ii^al&du, banii.
4. So also Amiaud. Better probably it might be translated by ' mistress of
those that decree the fates of heaven and earth.'
5. {dingir) Mti-tu := bllit ilitti = am lur-iur-ne = {dingir') Nin^arsag; see
above, col. i. 1 ff.
200
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
15
Gu-de-a
mu-gil-sa
pa-ie-si
Sir-pur-la-^'
{ga)lu E-ninn4
(dingir) Nin-gir-su-ka
in-ru-a
ud {*».?'■'') Innanna-ge
igi-nam-ti-ka-ni
mu-igi-bar-ra-a
Gu-de-a
pa-te-si
Sir-pur-la-ki
gis-iugi^-pi) dagal-a-kam
nita^ nin-a-ni
ki-ag-a-an
ga u-iuh-ba-ka
gis-ba-^ar
ka-al-ka
URU-la-mul
Gudea,
the mugilsa,
patesi
of Shirpurla,
who the Eninnfl
of Ningirsu
has built,
when by Innanna
with the eye of her love
he had looked upon,
then Gudea,
patesi
of Shirpurla,
who has great intelligence,
the hero of his mistress,
her beloved,
of the 'situation of the founda-
tion ' (?)
a draft he made,
of Ka-al
its Uru he has made to shine (?).
Col. III.
im-bi ki-la^-lag-ga-a
im-mi-dib
seg-bi
ki-el-la
im-mi-du
tH-bi mu-azag
Ml im-ta-lal
Its clay from a pure place
he took,
its bricks
on a shining (sacred) place
he formed,
its foundation he made bright,
and purified it.
11. 5. See Jensen, K. B. iii'. p. 29: ' Schatzspender, toortlich : Zumesser,
Lieferer von Kostbarkeiten,' and especially note.
12. igi-nam-ti, lit. 'the eye of life.'
20 ff. See Jensen, K. B. iii\ p. 56, Statue F, col. ii. 12 ff., and his notes.
III. I ff. Jensen, ibid.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
201
15
iemen-bi
ni-ir nun-ka
su-tag ha-ni-dug
e ki-ag-ga-ni
E-an-na iag Gir-su-^'-ka
mu-na-ni-ru
kur Ma-gan-^^-ta
f"^) KAL im-ta-DUL-DU
alan-na-ni-ku
mu-tu
Gru-de-a
{ga)lu e-ru-a-ka
Its Temen
in the Ni-ir of the Nun
he commanded to cast.
His beloved temple,
the Eanna in Girsu,
he built.
From the mountain of Magan
dolerite he brought down ;
into his statue
he formed it.
' Gudea,
who has built this temple,
Col. IV.
10
nam-ti-la-ni ^e-sud
mu-ku mu-na-sa
E-an-na-ka
mu-na-ni-iur
{ga)lu E-an-na-ta
ib-ta-db-ud-du-md-du-a
ib-zi-rira
mu-sar-a-ba lu-ne ib-ur-a
(dingir) Innanna
nin kur-hur-ra-ge
sag-ga-ni sun-na
nam ^e-ma-tar-e
(f*^ gu-za gub-ba-na
gir-bi
his life may be long I '
he called its name,
and into the temple of Eanna
he brought it.
Whosoever out of the Eanna
shall bring it,
and shall break it (?),
his writing shall blot out,
Innanna,
the mistress of the lands,
his head may she destroy (?),
(his) fate may she decree,
of his established throne
its foundation
15. («a) KAL, Br. 6209 = «Jrf. Jensen, K. B. iii'. p. 61 = dolerite; see
also B, vii. 11.
IV. 2. Lit. ' he pronounced it for its name.'
5 ff. Comp. B, viii. 6 ff.
II. sun, T. C. 95 = Br. 250.
202
EARLY BA
BYLOI
SIAN HiaiUKX
15
na-an-gi-ni
may she not uphold,
KUL-a-ni^e-m
his seed may she kill,
bal-a-ni ^e-tar
his dynasty may she cut off.
Statue E.
Cartouche.
Gu-de-a
Gudea,
pa-le-si
patesi
Sir-pur-la-''*
of Shirpurla.
Col.
I.
(dingir) Ba-U
Unto Ba'u,
sal sag-ga
the gracious lady,
dumu An-na
the daughter of Anu,
nin Uru-azag-ga
the mistress of Uruazagga,
5
nin ^e-ghl
the mistress of riches.
nin
Gir-su-^'-a nam-tar-
-ri
the mistress who decrees the
fates of Girsu,
nin di-kud uru-na
the judge of her city,
nin sag-e ki-ag
the most beloved mistress,
nin nin-u-gu-de-a
the mistress of those that seek
refuge.
10
nin-a-ni
his mistress.
Gu-de-a
Gudea,
pa-te-si
patesi
I. I ff. See also Ur-Ba'u IV., 3 ff. ; Gudea, Statues B, viii. 58 ff. : (diugit^
Ba'u, nin dumu-sag An-na-ge ; G, ii. 4 ff. ; H, i. I ff. ; and especially E. A. H.
362, iff.: (dingir) SAL (var. Nin)-IN-SI-NA , nin-gal am kalam-ma, zi-gil
kalam dim-dim-me, dumu-sag an-azag-ga — hence (dingir) SAL (var. Ntn)-IN-
SI-NA, or also (dingir) Nin-in-ni-si-an-na (Br. iio^z) = (dingir) Ba-u.
6. nam-tar = 'itmtu sdmu, H. W. B. 654 ; Br. 381.
8. sag, Br. 3523 ; rtstH, H. W. B. 607. Amiaud : dame amie des moriels (?).
9. For U-GU-DE, see Br. 6035 and 6721 : na'butu, and when with amSlU
thei) = munnaiiu ; comp. also H. W. B. p. 1^ sub abdtuiy. Translate: mis-
tress {nin) of those that (a) seek refuge (nin-u-gu-de). Here apparently an
allusion to the name ' Gudea ' itself. Amiaud : dame du iripas (?).
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
203
Str-pur-la-^i
{ga)lu E-ninnil
15 (^'"g'*-') Nin-gir-su'ka
E'PA e-ub-'j (tmin)
mu-ru-a
ud (•iim*-) Ba-u
20 lag azag-ga-ni ba-an-pad-da-a
of Shirpurla,
who the Eninnfl
of Ningirsu,
the Epa, a temple of seven spheres,
has built.
When Ba'u
his mistress
in her glorious heart had called
him —
nita^ im-tug
nin-a-na kam
nam-ma^ nin-a-na
mu-zu-zu
Pl-LUL-da
(dingir £a-U
nin-a-na-ku
Ll-im-ma-h- TA R
NIN E-ninnil
e ki-ag'ni
(din^ir) Ntn-gir-su
Col. II.
he was a wise (circumspect)
servant
of his mistress ;
the greatness of his mistress
he knew —
in his great wisdom
to Ba'u
his mistress
he intrusted himself.
Just as (it was that) the Eninnu,
his beloved temple
of Ningirsu,
i6. E-PA. So Jensen, K. B. iii'. p. 50, note 13, according to whom it is =
' Haus des Gipfels.' Amiaud : E-GUD = ' the house of light ' (Z. A. iii. 36 ff.).
For e-ub-'j, see Jensen, K. B. iii^. p. 51, note **°, and comp. Statue G, i. 13 ff.
II. I. im-tug, Br. 8494/5 ; nd'idu, ialdiu. Amiaud : en serviteur pkin
de crainte respectueuse.
2. Comp. F, ii. 10, 11, where Jensen leaves the iam untranslated.
4. lu-zu, Br. 130; id4, H. W. B. 305. Amiaud: ilaproclami.
5. PI==uznu, Br. 7969 ; LUL, Br. 7269 : dannu ; Br. 7272 : ma'du.
8. LI-TAR, Br. 1122 : pakddu, H. W. B. 534 ; with ana{'=KU)'=' Jemd.
etwas amiertrauen, anbefehlen.' /m-ma-H =veiha.l prefix, comp. T)6c. 8, iii. 2 :
im-'ii-gi, and Hommel, S. L. p. 144.
9. NIN and gim (1. 13) belong together. Nin here = relative particle ;
comp. iv. R. 7, 30 a: nin MAL-E ni-zu-a-mu =sa a-na-ku i-du-ti. The
apodosis begins with 1. 21.
204
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
lugal-a-ni
mu-na-ru-a-gim
ud (*V'>-) Ba-u
15 dumu An-na
nin Uru-azag-ga
nin-a-ni
E-SIL-GID-GID
e ki-ag-ni
20 mu-na-ru-a
uru mu-azag
Ml im-ma-ta-lal
his king,
he had built,
when for Ba'u,
the daughter of Anu,
the mistress of Uruazagga,
his mistress,
the E-SIL-GID-GID,
her beloved temple,
he had built,
so also the city he made to shine
and purified it.
Col. III.
ga gis-sub-ba-ka
gis-ba-gar
ka-al-ka
Ce**) URUba-mul
im-bi ki-la^-la^
im-mi-dib
"seg-bi ki-el-la
im-mi-du
Of the ' situation of the
foundation ' (?)
a draft he made,
of^.^-^Z
its URU he made to shine (?) ;
its clay from a pure place
he took,
its bricks on a shining (sacred)
place
he formed ;
18. Amiand : E-SIL-SIR-SIR (see Z. A. ii. 297, and ibid. iii. 48), who ex-
plains it by ' milky way.'
22. Jensen (see F, iii. 2 ; and comp. further below, 1. 12, and C, iii. 7) trans-
lates 'fiillte mit Feuerbrand^ ; Amiaud, ' il a fait dicombrer ! The sense is
' he purified it,' i. c. he bumed up the rubbish by kindling a fire on different
places, hence lit. ' he filled (sc. the city) with fire.'
III. 1-8 occur again in F, ii. 12-19, ^^^ C, ii. 20-iii. 5 ; see Jensen, K. B.
iii'. p. 56 ff.
1. ga gii-'iub-ba-ka = ga gii-u-'iub-ba-ka (F, ii. 12) =^ ga ii-iub-ba-ka (C,
ii. 20).
2. F, ii. 13 : gH-ba-an-gar.
4. C, ii. 23, has only f/^ i7 without ^j.
5. F, ii. 16, has ki-azag-ga, and C, iii. X, ki-lag-lag-ga-a,
7. Forms in C,iii, two lines (3, 4). F, ii. 18 : ki-el-a
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
205
the bricks for the foundation
he made,
in splendour he made them to
shine ;
its foundation he made bright
and purified it ;
its Temen
in the Ni-ir of the Nun
he commanded to cast.
For Ba'u,
his mistress,
the mistress who directs
Uruazagga,
in Uruazagga
CoL IV.
hg gik-iub-ba ni-gar
1 o nin- UL pa-ne-ud-du
ui-bi mu-azag
bil im-ta-lal
temen-bi
ni-ir nun-ka
15 iu-tag ba-ni-dug
(dingir) jBa-u
nin-a-ni
nin Uru-azag-gi
im-si-a-an
20 Uru-azag-ga
ki-la^-la^-ga-a
' e mu-na-ru
(ffih DVR-GAR ma^
nam-nin-ka-ni
5 mu-na-gim
ki-di-kud-na
mu-na-tum
DUP-PISAN azag^a-ni her holy (bright) JDUP-PISAN
9. Lines 9 and 10 are left out in C and F. For gH-sub-ba, comp. above,
iii. I.
10. NIN-UL = ulm, Br. 9148; H. W. B. 76: ' Cppigkeit, strotunde Fulle
Oder Pracht' Vox j>a-ud-du, see Jensen, K. B. lii'. pp. 114, 115, notes 3, 4,
and * = 'iApA ' vollenden' and ' aufstrahkn lassen.'
11. Lines 11-15 again in C, iii. 6-10 ; F, iii. 1-5.
16. Lines 16-19 are left out in F.
19. Si or SI-DI='y&>, H. W. B. 310. Here = iii2: sutliuru.
20-IV. 7 = F, iii. 6-1 1.
IV. I. Comp. C, iii. i, and above, iii. 5.
3. See A, ii. 3.
6. Comp. above, i. 7.
8, See A, ii. i .
on a pure place
a temple he built,
the sublime throne
of her ladyship
he made,
in her judgement place
he put it up ;
206 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
mu-na-gim he made,
10 e ma^-a-e into her very sublime temple
mu-na-ni-tur he brought it ;
DIM(/) Nin-an-da-gal-ki the altar of Nin-an-da-gal-ki
mu-na-gim he made,
e-ma^-na in her sublime temple
15 mu-na-ni-tum he put it up,
10. Remarkable is ma^-a-E. Ought we to take E in the sense of rabA (Br.
5845) ?
1 2. For the reading and signification of the first sign, see above (sub Naram -
Sin), note 7 to Comptes Rendus, 1899, p. 348, pi. i. Nin-an-da-gal-ki =
attribute of Ba'u ; the name may be translated ' Mistress (k/«) of the wide or
great {da-gal, phonetic writing for dagal= rap'iu rapcCitu)\ii&ytn {an) and earth
{ki).' Comp. also note to col. i. i.
Cols. V. i-vii. 21 are found again in Statue G, col. iii. g-end.
The following diiferences, however, are noteworthy :
E, V. 15 : 7 SAL-GIS-SA-ge-{GU) = G, iv. 9: 7 {fiU)-SAL-
GI&SA-ge.
16: iz KUR-GIG-{fiU)=G,iv. 10: \^{GV)-KUR-GIG.
18 : GIS-6U-bi-\z = G, iv. 12 : ditto (Jensen has instead of
15 only 7. But why?).
E, vii. 6 : 7 SAL-GIS-SA-ge-{GU) = G, vi. 3 : 7 {6U)-SAL-
GIS-SA-ge.
6: 15 KUR-GIG-{Gl7)=G,vi. 4: io.KUIi-GIG-{dU).
10: I TU-dA-SUGUR-A = G,v\.9,: i GA-SUdUR-TU.
12 : 40 GU-LU-SAR = G, vi. 10: ditto. Jensen only 7 !
Why?
To E, v. 21, 22, vi. I, and vii. i2-r5 = G, iv. 15-17, vi. 10-12,
compare also Hommel, P. S. B. A. May, 1893, p. 292, who reads:
40 gh dibs or
7 gh gihil-bar
1 gu GIS-MA-NU
and translates :
forty receptacles for writing utensils,
seven boxes (or jars) for fire-lighting,
one vessel for wooden staffs {sic Hommel !).
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
207
Statue E, VII. 22 ff.
e dingir) Ba-u
ki-U gi-a-da
^e-gal-hi
When the temple of Ba'u
had thus been restored ;
when in beauty
Col. VIII.
pa-ud-du-A G-da
p^ DUR-GAR Sir-pur-la-
gir-li gi-na-da
Gu-de-a
5 pa-te-si
&ir-pur-la-^-ka
pa ka-gi-na
iu-na ghl-la-da
nam-ti-la-na
10 ud-bi sud-a-da
dingir-ra-ni
(dingir) Nin-gis-ztd-da
(dingir) ^a-U
e Vru-azag-ga-na
1 5 mu-na-da-iur-tur
it had been made to shine ;
when of the throne of Shirpurla
(its) the foundation had been
established ;
when to Gudea,
the patesi
of Shirpurla,
a sceptre of truth
into his hand had been put ;
when of his life
(its) the days had been length-
ened;
then his god(s)
Ningishzidda
(and) Ba'u
into their (his, her) temple in
Uruazagga
he (Gudea) brought.
VII. 23. The DA in this line, as well as in 11. viii. i, 3, 8, 10, has to be
taken in the sense of ina = ^^j^ ' when.' The apodosls follows in viii. 11.
VIII. I. For ia-tid-du, see above, iii. 10. We would expect for AG-da
either AG-GA-da or AG-a-da; comp, above, vii. 23, gi-a-da; viii. 10, sud-
a-da, and 1. 3, gi-na-da; 1. 8, ghl-la-da.
3. G/H-'E. C. 306; C, iv. 15.
7. /o ka-gi-na, lit. a sceptre (rule) of a truthful (true) month.
208
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
iag mu-ba-ka
kur Ma-gan-'''-ta
(«^) KAL im-ta-DUL-DV
alan-na-ku
20 mu-tu
nin-mu ba-zig-gi
nam-ti ba
ud sag gab zal-zal (sic)
mu-ku mu-na-sa
5 e a-mu-na-ni-tur
alan
(ga)lu e (*«^'>-) Ba-u
mu-ru-a-kam
ki-gub-ba-bi
(ga)lu
nu-zi-zi
In that very same year
from the mountain of Magan
dolerite he brought ;
into his statue
he formed it.
Col. IX.
' Oh, my mistress, be gracious,
give life ;
the days of my life with strength
make to overflow and abound ! '
he called its name ;
into the temple he brought it.
The statue
is that of him- who the temple
of Ba'u
has built.
From the place it has been
put up,
let no one take it a\A ay I
i6. In the Temple Records of Ur IV. we sometimes find for "iag mu-ba-ka
also 'iag mu-ba {ltd) ghl-a-an.
IX. LI. 1-3 contain the name of the statue. Amiaud, who wrongly read
ni-ru for zal-zal (sic, clear on the photo.), was not able to translate it.
1. ba-zig-gi occnrs again in another name, that of a GAG-Glk (see C. T. i.
No. 96-6-15, i), and means there ' to look favourably upon ' (waJaJ ia Ini).
2. BA has to be taken here in the sense of kdsu, Br. lo'j ; H. W. B. 584.
Comp. also O. B. I. 61 : a-na, (H") Niii-ib, be-li-su Kad-dti-man-Tur-gu, apil
Na-zi-ma-ru-ut-tdi, AS-ME ("«) zagin IB-BI, u-'ie-pii-ma, a-na ba-la-ti-iu,
i-ki-ii, with O. B. I. 49 : (dingiy) Nin-lil, Ku-ri-gal-zu, in-na-ba.
3. UD = ' Lebenstage' H. W. B. 306; GAB is parallel to ZAL-ZAL.
GAB, Br. 4474: da^ddu, H. W. B. 214; strotzen, triefen, ii' triefend,
strotzend, iiberfliessend machen. ZAL-ZAL, Br. 5358 : bard, H. W. B. 184 ;
strotzen, iii^, strotzen machen, reichlich versorgen. SAG is obj. to gab and
zal-zal SAG, according to Br. 3515, may also mean ^arnu, ' Horn' = Hebr.
pip, in the sense of ' strength.'
9. DUiig-ub = kdnu ii'. Lit. from the place of its having been put up.
10. Zi-zi=nas6JiU, Br. 2349; H. W. B. 471.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
209
di-kd-bi
(^gd)lu la ba-m-lal-e
This ordinance
let no one set at naught !
II. Lit. 'this word {di=dabdbu, Br. 9524) of mouth {ka=piX).
13. Lai, probably here \>tA = ndiA, Br. loloi ; H. W. B. 484 :
LA is parallel to NU, 1. 10, hence it must be = Assyr. lA, which latter, when in
a prohibitive sentence, is used with the present, Delitzsch, Assyr. Gram. § 144.
This present we find even here : LAL-E. Thus we have here a remarkable
Semitic influence. Comp. also ii. R. 15, 30 a : la ba-an-H-in-gin = la im-gu-
ur, where LA is also to be found for the regular _NU. Amiaud, who trans-
lated ses prescriptions que personne ne les iransgresse, apparently took LA also
in the sense of NU; see also R. A. ii. p. 19. It is, however, also possible to
take DI-KA in the sense of sattAku, then to be read SA-DUG (see Urnkagina
above, p. 50), -col. iv. 3, and to translate it : ' its (i. c. of the statue) appointed
offerings let no one take away.'
Statue H,
Col. I.
Kdinsir) Ba-U
Unto Ba'u,
sal iag-ga
dumu An-nd
the gracious lady,
the daughter of Anu,
nin Uru-azag-ga
nin ^e-ghl
the mistress of Uruazagga,
the mistress of riches,
dumu an-azag-gd
the child of the bright heaven,
nin-a-ni
his mistress,
Gu-de-a
Gudea,
pd-te-si
&ir-pur-la-'"'-ge
patesi
of Shirpurla.
Col. II.
ud E-SIL-GID-GID
e ki-ag-ni
e ^e-UL Uru-dZdg^ga
mu-na-ru-a
When the E-SIL-GID-GID,
his beloved temple,
the temple, the beauty of
Uruazagga,
he had built,
I. I. See E, i. i ff.
II. I. See E, ii. 18.
3. GE=Jsegallu, duJsdu, daJiMu ; UL, see E, iii. 10.
2IO EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
5 kur Mk-gan-^'-ta (then) from the mountain of
Magan
(«fl) ]{AL (sic) im-ta-DUL- dolerite he brought down ;
DU
alan-na-ni-ht into his statue
mu-tu he formed it.
Col. in.
nin dumu ki-ag an-azag-ga-ge ' Oh, mistress, beloved child
of the bright heaven !
am k'l'ng''-') Ba-u ' Oh, mother Ba'u !
E-SIL-GID-GID-ta out of the E-SIL-GID-GID
Gu-de-a unto Gudea
5 nam-ti mu-na-suvi give life 1 '
mu-ku mu-na-sa he called its name ;
e Uru-azag-ga-ka into the temple of Uruazagga
mu-na-ni {sic)-/ur he brought it.
6. The original has FA for /^AZ.
III. 5. For other names see above, sui Nammagni, p. 187, note 12.
8. For RU oi the original we have to read ni !
The buildings of Gudea were too numerous to allow of a com-
plete description ; what has already been given will suffice.
Gudea was married to a certain Gin-Dunpauddu \ and was
followed on the throne of Shirpurla by his son Ur-Ningirsu"^^
' Menant, Catal. des Cyl. p. 59 ; K. B. iii'. p. 65 e. Jensen reads the
name Gin-^d'ngir) Umun-pa-tid-du. This name vifas read correctly first by
Hommel, Z. A. i. 439 f.
' His name means : ' The servant of Ningirsu ' (Assyr. Kalbi-Ninib'). His
inscriptions are :
R. A. iii. p. 120.
Dec. 37, 9 ; Jensen, 1. c. p. 66 « ; A. B. K. p. 7, No. 13.
Le Clercq, ii. pi. ix. 4, and p. 87.
The inscriptions : D^c. 26, 5, identical with Dec. 37, 8, also to be found in
A. B. K. p. 7, Nos. 14, 15, see Jensen, K. B. iii'. p. 66^ (comp. above,
p. 37, note i) ; and Winckler, U. A. G. p. 157, No. 9 ( = C. T. 12218), see Jensen,
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 2Ii
Very little can be said of him. He seems to have continued
the work of his father in building the Eniimfi and the gigunu
(DunkelgemacH).
After a gap of probably one or more generations, we come to
UrXdingir) JSfin-sun ^ Our only knowledge in regard to him is that
he presented a vase to Ningirsu, the strong hero of Enlil, with the
petition to lengthen his hfe.
After a further gap in the succession of the patesis, we reach the
last of the known rulers of Shirpurla, viz. {Ga)lu-ka-m. Three
inscriptions — as far as I know — mention a patesi (Ga)lu-ka-ni.
The first — see above, p. 21 — records that a certain Gala-Lama,
the son of ((ra)/a-/;a-w', patesi of Shirpurla, dedicates an inscription
' for the life of Dungi, the mighty king, king o/^ Ur, and king of
Skumer and Akkad? This (Ga)lukani clearly, then, is a contem-
porary of Dungi I.
The second — see above, p. 22 — on the other hand, tells us that
a certain (Ga)lukani, patesi of Shirpurla, dedicates an inscription
for Dungi, the mighty hero, king of Ur. This inscription we refer
to another (Ga)lukani — a contemporary of Dungi II. of the third
dynasty of Ur; see above, p. 22, note 2; p. 37, note 2; and sub
fourth dynasty of Ur.
The third — see Scheil in Rec. de Trav. xviii. p. 74 — is in the
form of a contract-tablet (a receipt, lu-ba-H, of grain), which has
the date : itu SE-IL-LA mu en Eridug-''' ba-a-tug, together with
the following seal-impression: —
idingir) uiu-a Utua,
dumu Ur- .... the son of Ur . . .
K. B. iii'. p. 68 ii. (comp. above, p. 37), do not belong to Ur-Ningirsu, the
patesi of Shirpurla. See above, p. 35 ff. They, however, may be placed under
the reign of Dungi II., ' king of Ur.'
' Thus we ought to pronounce his name, as has been shown by Scheil, R. T.
xii. 208, on the basis of Gudea, Cyl. B, 23, 19 : {•li"gi'') JVin-gii-zid-c/a, dumu-
ja^ (Price gnes dumu-kd), An-na-kam,dingir am-zu (dbigir) Nin-sun-na. See
a:lso for another dutmt-sag of Anu, Gudea, Statue E, i. i, note. UrM'neii-)
Ninsun = Assyr. Kalbi-Ninsun, the servant of Ninsun. His inscriptions ;
Heuzey, R. A. ii. 79; Oppert, ibid.; and Jensen, K. B. iii'. p. 77. Comp.
above, p. 21.
p 2
212 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
dup-sar tlie scribe (of)
(J3d)lu-ka-ni (Ga)lukani,
5 pa-te-si patesi
^ir-pur-la-''' of Shirpurla.
This inscription leaves it doubtful whether it refers to (Ga)lu-
kani, the contemporary of Dungi II., or to Dungi III (see sub
Ur IV.). Hence this much only we can say, that (Ga)Iukani, the
father of Gala-Lama, with whom we are concerned here, was de-
pendent on Dungi I. ; so also was his son, who however seems to
have lost the position of patesi of Shirpurla altogether, as this title
is lacking in his inscription (D^c. 21, 4; Jensen, K. B. iii'. p. 70 ;
and above, p. i)'.
With (Ga)lukani an important period of Old Babylonian history
terminates. Shirpurla-Girsu (also called Lagash) no doubt was
the cify, around which the other cities grouped themselves. These
other cities rise into prominence as they become related to or
masters of Shirpurla. This naturally produced a chequered and
1 Scheil published a portion of an inscription, Rec. de Trav. xix. p. jo, 9,
which reads :
(Dingir) Dun-gi To Dungi,
nitag lig-ga the mighty hero,
&c. ... &c. . . . .
Al-la-mu Allamu,
{dumu) Ur-Sag-ga-mu the son of Ur-Saggamu,
pa-ie-si patesi.
He adds in a note ; ' Elle nous livre h noni iVun nouveau patesi, — de Sirpurla,
Ms vraisemblablement. — Ce cylindre voui d Dungi ne prouve pas que le patesi
fUt son contemporain. On en vouail aux rois difunts, comme on continuait
en £gypte d graver le cartouche de Ramsis II., par exemple, sur les scarabies,
jusque vers tipoque ptolimaique' (cf. Rec. de Trav. xviii. p. 7a, suiv. i).
This opinion rests upon no real foundation, Allamu may be a patesi of any
other city. The Dungi — as long as Scheil withholds the remainder of his
titles — may be just as well Dungi II. of the third dynasty of Ur, who bore
the title lugat Urum-ki-ma, or Dungi III. of the fourth dynasty, who calls
himself lugal Urum-ki-ma lugal an-nb-da tab-tab-ba-ge. Dungi I. (Ur II.)
terms himself lugal Urum-ki-ma lugal Ki-en-gi-ki-Urdu-ge. It would be well
and advisable to publish not only the name of the kings, but also their titles.
fSee however sub Ur IV.)
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 213
varied development in the fortunes of Shirpurla. The oldest
dynasty, headed by Urukagina, vpas reduced from the rank of
' kings ' to that of patesis by the northern power of Kish. We
have already been introduced to three kings of this latter country,
viz. U-dug-?, Mesilim, the contemporary of Lugalshuggur, and
Lugal-da ?-ak ?. The struggle lay between the north and the south.
Such conflicts had already taken place before the time of Uruka-
gina. Enshagkushanna, lord of Kengi, had to fight this very same
enemy in the north.
Thus, in the earliest recorded period of Babylonian history, we
find the question raised : Who shall govern in Babylonia ? Shall
the north be the master, or shall it be the south ? The struggle was
protracted. Eannatum, the son of Akurgal, succeeded in throwing
off the obnoxious yoke of Kish, placed upon Shirpurla in the time
of his predecessors. No doubt Ur-Nina, his grandfather, had
initiated the conflict, for he terms himself ' king,' which he could
not have done if he were' still dependent upon Kish. Eannatum,
however, dealt the last and decisive blow against Kish, under
Al-zu-zu-a, whom he burnt, and whose gods he cast into the fire.
In consequence of this victory he became himself ' king of Kish.'
How long he retained this, digfnity we cannot tell. It seems, how-
ever, that his successors were unable permanently to preserve what
Eannatum had left them. Another power acquired in course of
time great prominence. This power is Gishban, the northern
neighbour of Shirpurla.
Already during the reign of Eannatum we find it filled with a
hostile spirit against Shirpurla. This hostility of Gishban against
its southern neighbour no doubt resulted from the instigation of
Kish, for we find that a certain Enne-Ugun not only was ' king
of Kishj'-but also 'king of the hosts of Gishban ^' Probably no
' This, however, is true only if we suppose that the reading erim (gi^)BANJ"
be correct. If, on the other hand, we read for erim ^i)BAN-l'i =Uh (which
Hommel reads SAB-BAN=\}\>\, Opis), we would have to suppose that Kish
was not allied with (g'S)BAN->'', but with Uh. But even this alliance was
defeated by an unknown king of Shirpurla.
214 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
enemy of Shirpurla was as pertinacious as Gishban. Again and
again it renewed its hostilities, although repeatedly defeated, and
bound by solemn obligations ' never to invade the territory of
Shirpurla again.' Gishban was resolved to obtain possession of
Babylonia — and it succeeded. Lugalzaggisi, the son of the patesi
Ukush, not only made himself master of the whole of Babylonia
(no doubt Shirpurla included), but he also became lugal-kalam-ma,
' king of the world,' his empire extending from the Persian Gult
to the Mediterranean Sea.
This great empire, however, did not hold its own very long.
Although the whole of Babylonia had been temporarily united
under one sceptre, yet not very long after the time of Lugalzaggisi
we meet with the same disintegration as had previously existed.
The great empire was once more split into north and south. The
chief rdle in the south was taken by Ur under Lugalkigubnidudu,
who even succeeded in gaining possession of Erech and Nippur
(consequently also Shirpurla). The north is again represented by
Kish under Urzaguddu, Lugaltarsi, Manishtusu, and Alusharshid.
This division, however, did not last long. Agade in the north,
under Sargon I., obtained the chief power. Sargon I. and his son,
Naram-Sin, not only succeeded in bringing the north and the south
of Babylonia together, but they extended their dominion in all
directions far beyond its confines, so that Naram-Sin could call
himself 'king of the four corners of the world' — a title which
consequently indicates the extension of the empire geographi-
cally.
The tide ' king of the four corners of the world ' may mean the
same, it was said above (p. 1 63 fF.), as the Sumerian lugal-Italam-ma,
' king of the world.' A closer examination, however, will show that the
former includes more. ' King of the world ' {lugal-kalam-ma) does not
involve dominion over the extreme north, or over Eastern Arabia
and Magan, or over Elam. The expression 'from the rising of
the sun to the going down of the sun ' is explained by the words
immediately following : ' from the lower sea of the Tigris and the
Euphrates to the upper sea' (Lugalzag. i. 46; ii, 9). According
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 215
to this, then, a ' kingship of the world ' would be a dominion
extending from the Persian Gulf up, between the rivers Tigris and
Euphrates (comp. gi'r-bt, Lugalzag. ii. lo flf.), to the Mediterranean
Sea.
The ' gravitation point ' of such a kingdom lay in the west, in
the countries extending from the Tigris and Euphrates in the north
to the Mediterranean.
A 'kingship of the four corners of the world,' on the other hand,
not only included the nam-lugal-kalam-ma, but in addition to this
the lands lying further to the north, as well as those to the east
and south. This is clearly shown by an inscription to be found in
Peters, Nippur, ii. p. 239 (see below), where we read that Gimil-
Sin was called by Nannar to be the
sib kalam-ma
la an-ub-da tab-tab-ba-ku,
i.e. 'shepherd of the world and of the four corners of the world.'
If therefore the title lar kibrat arba'im was nothing more than
a translation of the nam-lugal-kalam-ma (Hilprecht, O. B. I. p. 270),
this title here would be meaningless. Gimil-Sin then would simply
state the same thing twice, which is very improbable. Hence the
title an-ub-da tab-tab-ba must include more. Thus we can only
maintain that lugal an-ub-da tab-tab-ba is = lar kibrat arba'im, and
that lugal-kalam-ma is a title by itself, while a lar kiHati does not
exist at this time.
How long this ' kingship of the four corners of the world ' lasted,
we cannot tell. Eventually the successors of Naram-Sin were
forced to yield Shirpurla to the kings of the second dynasty of Ur,
Ur-Gur and Dungi I.
The Second Dynasty of Ur.
A remarkable change takes place in the titles of these kings.
They not only call themselves lugal Uru-um-^'-ma \ i, e. ' king of
' Written Uru-unuigj-ki-ma = title of UrIII.
2l6 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
Ur,' but also lugal Ki-en-^gi-ki-Urdu, i.e. 'king of Shumer and
Akkad.' What does this latter title mean ?
In the bilingual inscriptions of Hammurabi the expression Ki-
en-gi-ki-Urdu is translated by burner ini^ it Akkadim'^. Shumer
therefore must correspond to Kengi aiid Akkad to Urdu. Is it
possible to derive Shumer from Ki-en-gi ?
The word Ki-en-gi\% also written Ki-in-gi, Kingin, and even Kin-
gi-ra (Lehmann, Shamashshumukin, p. 85, and Winckler, A. O. V.
1887, p. 20). As regards the pronunciation of the signs BUR-
BUR = Urdu or Uru', see Lehmann, 1. c, p. 85.
It has been stated above (under Enshagkushanna and Ur-Nina)
that some scholars derive the word Shumer either directly or in-
directly from SU{2V) + GIR. But we must go a step further.
There is little doubt that Shumer is derived from Sungir. But can
we prove that Sungir is = Kengin, or better Kengir ? For the
change of n to r, comp. Unug = Uruk ; gan = kar, which change
undoubtedly occurred under Semitic influence. That k in Sume-
rian can become j — when it stands before ' i und i-verwandten
Vokalen ' — is proved by a comparison of KU = su = He (Z. K.
p. 99 f. ; Lehmann, 1. c. p. 86), The form Kingir would become
consequently Singir, exactly the form which we have in Hebrew
"^l^ ' ; and if we lake into consideration the form S^.ngara,
which occurs in inscriptions of Thutmosis III, (see Tiele, Ge-
schichte, pp. 139, 145), it is evident that the Hebrew tj' originally
was s. As was shown above, under Lugalzaggisi, I in the oldest
inscriptions is represented by s; compare such forms as u-sa-za-
ku-ni (O. B. I. i. 14), zera^su (ibid. 11. 20, 23)*- From this, then,
' Written either Su-me-er-im, Su-me-rim, or Su-me-ri-im, Lehmann,
Shamashshnmukin, p. 84, note 6.
* Written Ak-ka-di-im, Ak-ka-di-i, Ak-kad-i, Lehmann, ibid. p. 84, notes 2
and 3 ; but also Ak-dUi, Lehmann, ibid. p. 73, note 9.
' The a-sound in Hebrew is probably due to the guttural V-
* It may not be impossible that the pronunciation of .S" for S is due to Arabic
influence. This would be only another proof that the Semites originally came
from Arabia, for 11-sa-za-ku-ni and zera-su bear marks of South Arabic
formation ; comp. 1t}'33 = y~^->.< his son,' and B'B'Xi'B" = |_^i,t^^, 'he
went away.'
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 217
would follow that the Hebrew -\yief is a younger form of Sangar(a),
and consequently also of Sungir. The development so far would
be I^^ngtfi=Kmg{r=S^ngar=Sungir='^Tii^. Little or no stress
can be laid upon the change of the vowels, as is evident from
a comparison of the variety of the forms for Kingin \
The next development in these forms is that ng becomes m; comp.
dtngt'r=dimmer. Sungir then becomes Sumir, and with a softening
of the s to i (as in the Hebrew nyJB') Sumir. An i before r is
changed very often to e (Haupt, ' The Assyr. E-vowel,' American
Journal of Philology, vol. iii. p. 287): Sumir becomes Sumer.
Hence Sumer = Sungir = Kengin. From the inscriptions of
Ur-Nini we know that the Nin-Su(n)gir was the god of Girsu-
Shirpurla. Girsu consequently is only a metathesis of the original
Sungir, exactly as apsu is that of zu-ab, or lugal that o{gal+ga{^u)^.
After the metathesis had taken place Girsun became Girsu, losing
its final n. Girsun would then be the older form for Girsu, as
Kengin is the older form for Kengi.
What follows from these considerations? Simply and solely this:
Kengi is the oldest name for Sungir (= Girsu-Shirpurld) ', which
latter was pronounced by the Semites at the time of ffammurabi.
Shunter. Enshagkushanna en Kengi is the oldest {Sumerian ?) king
of Shirpurla ! Now we understand why the kings from Ur-Gur
to Dungi I. call themselves ' lugal Kengi!
' The original pronunciation was Kengin ; tlien, under Semitic influence, it
became Kengir {t^ony^. gan-kar), and then further Sengir. The e of the syllable
Sen was pronounced halfway between a and i — hence the name of Thutmosis III.
(comp. e.g. o?-/«-»««-Jk for 2j^?»2«?a, Amama, 121,20. ai = as = e'§ = i^). The
Semites in Babylonia proper pronounced Snngir, which again was heard as
^5'3E' by the Canaanites (comp. Amama, 1 2 T , 13: is-ta-ia-^i-in for ustajaiin
in Assyr. iknus and iknU. u=:u = f).
' Comp. also in Semitic languages : 3^^ = kardbu = Hebr. ^"13 ," Assyr.
lairu = Hebr. bvn, Arab. Jj>j, &c.
" The very fact that we have a ICI, = ' place,' after Kengi speaks for our
explanation. Quite different is Hommel's view(P. S. B. A., May, 1894, p. 209),
who reads Kl-Imgi Kl-Urra.
2l8 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
We know from the inscription of Gala-Lama that Dungil. was in
possession of Girsu-Shirpuria (K. B. iii'- p. 71, 9). He, writing in
the Sumerian dialect, uses for Girsu-Shirpurla only the original
Sumerian name Kengi in contradistinction to Urdu.
Further, if Kengi-Shumer is the city (land) of Girsu, and lugal
Kengi means ' king of Girsu,' then lugal Urdu must mean ' king of
the city (land) of Urdu.' This latter word, as we have seen, is
translated in Semitic by Akkad. Akkad undoubtedly is the later
pronunciation for Agad(e) ; the soft g has been changed to k '.
If Shumer-Sungir are the later forms for Kengi, then Agade-
Akkad must be the later forms for Urdu ; this would clearly follow
from the analogy of the case. How Agade-Akkad can be derived
from Urdu [BUR-BUR) is still a secret. And if lugal Kengi mtaxis
nothing less and nothing more than ' king of Girsu-Shirpurla,' it
follows from the parallelism in the title that lugal Urdu must mean
' king of Agade-Akkad.'
We have seen why the kings from Ur-Gur to Dungi I. called
themselves lugal Ki-en-gi, i, e. king of Kengi-Sungir-Shumer
(Girsu), viz. because they were in possession of Shirpurla. Hence
if they also call themselves lugal Urdu, i. e. king of Urdu-Agade-
Akkad, they must also have ruled over this latter city. It is true
that this statement cannot yet be substantiated from the inscrip-
tions. We know, however, that they possessed Kutha ^ (i. e. the
modern Tell Ibrahim, not far east of Babylon, Delitzsch, Parad.
p. 217 ff.). Since Agade lies a little further to the north of Kutha
it seems probable that they held sway over Agade also.
The question now remains, why should these kings adopt such
a title as ' lugal Ki-en-gi-^'-Urdu-ge' 1 We have already called the
attention of the reader to the protracted struggle between the north
and the south, stretching back to the earliest period of Babylonian
history. The south up to this time was mainly represented by
' The writing Ak-ka-di-i with double k results from its being syllabically
written. But comp. also Ak-di-i.
'' Mittheilungen des Akad.-Or. Ver. zu Berlin, i. p. 16 ; Winckler, K. B,
iii'. p. 81, 5.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 219
Girsu-Shirpurla. This was the case under Enshagkushanna, lord
of Kengi (i. e. Girsu), under Ur-Ninst and his successors, and also
the later patesis of Shirpurla. The north, on the other hand, was
represented sometimes by Kish, sometimes by Gishban, or by Kish
and Gishban together, and last of all by Agade-Akkad. The
victories of Kish were partial and intermittent. Even the supremacy
of Gishban under Lugalzaggisi exercised no such wide influence
over Babylonia as did that of Agade under Naram-Sin'. Thus
finally the kingdom of Agade became the true representative of the
north, in the same way as Shirpurla had been of the south, and
this was especially the case under Ur-Gur or possibly before. Ur-
Gur ruled over Shirpurla and over Urdu-Akkad, thus for the first
time uniting the two representative states or cities under one sceptre.
That Ur-Gur should thus use Urdu-Agade-Akkad to represent the
whole north is due to the fact that Agade had overcome Kish and
Gishban. Hence Agade had become, shortly before the time of
Ur-Gur, the true representative of the north.
We have seen that in the north (Gishban, Kish, Agade) from the
very beginning Semitic kings ruled, mostly using in the inscriptions
their own language. In the south, on the other hand, Semitic
(sic) kings reigned — it is true — but these kings spoke the Sumerian
language, at least used it in their inscriptions, and thus had become
' acclimatized,' i. e. had become ' naturalized Sumerians.' Ur-Gur in
using the title lugal Kt-en-gi-'''- Urdu-ge wished to indicate that he
was king both of the north, where the Semitic language was spoken,
and of the south, where the Sumerian language was used; in other
words, he was king both of the Sumerians ('pure' and 'naturalized')
and of the Semites. For the same reason also Hammurabi, who
had obtained possession of the iarriit Kengi-^'-Urdu in consequence
of his victory over Rim-Sin, and thus was able to call himself 'king
(lord) of the KALAM Sumerim ic Akkadim' wrote his inscriptions
in the two languages, thus claiming that he was king alike over
the Sumerians (in the largest sense) and the Semites.
This consideration supplies the key to the right understanding
' Notice also the diffeience betwfecn lugal-kalam-ma and "sar kibrat arhaim \
220 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
of the perpetual conflicts between the north and the south. The
north represented the pure Semitic race, pure at least to this
extent, that they spoke their own language. The south, originally
inhabited by a Sumerian population, passed gradually under the
rule of those Semites, who had remained there after the greater
part of them had left it to settle down in the north. These
Semites assimilated themselves to the Suraerians, accepted their
language, which they in the earlier or earliest period mingled with
a ' goodly lot ' of Semitisms (time of Eannatum, Entemena, Lugal-
zaggisi, &c.), but later on were able to write it comparatively well
(time of Gudea) ; nay, they even succeeded in acquiring the sove-
reignty of Shirpurla. The south therefore represents the old
Sumerians under the rule of assimilated Semites.
No wonder that the Semites of the north should be filled with
enmity towards their -degraded brethren in the south.
From the above-given facts it is evident that it matters very little
what derivation we ascribe to the actual term, ' Kengi or Urdu ' ;
whether we give to Kengi the meaning of ' the land of reeds and
rushes' (Hilprecht), or ' land rar i^oxnv' (Lehmann), or ' Ttefland'
(Winckler), and to Urdu or BUR-BUR the ' land of the strangers'
(Amiaud : bur-hur = 0ap-/3ap-(os) and perhaps = i'3"i'3 = ^3a, Gen.
iii. 9 ; see B. O. R. 123 f.), or ' the land of the two rivers ' (Lehmann,
Shamashshumukin, p. 92), or 'highland' (Tiele, Geschichte, p. 76 f.
Comp. also Winckler's idea : Kengi-ki-Urdu = Hochland und Ttef-
land).
Only so much is certain, that Kengi = Sungir=Shumer=Girsu-
Shirpurla, and Urdu = Agade = Akkad, both cities taken as the
representative cities of the north and of the south of Babylonia, where
the Semitic and the Sumerian languages were used respectively.
Hence, once more, ' lugal Kengi-^'-Urdu-ge ' means the king of the two
cities Girsu and Akkad, which are the representatives of the Sumerian
{or southern) and the Semitic [or northern) people and language; it is
therefore a geographic as well as ethnic title.
In conclusion we may note the views of earlier scholars with
regard to the meaning of this title.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 221
Pognon showed first that Kengi and Urdu denote two districts
of a territory subject to the kings of Babylon — Akkad on the
confines of Assyria, and Shumer, whose site is unknown (L'lnscrip-
tion de Bavian, pp. 125-134).
Winckler, on the other hand, tried to prove that Kengi-Urdu at
this time had a more restricted application to a kingdom of Southern
Babylonia, of which Ur was the capital. Hence the phrase is not
geographical but political. The capital of this small Southern
Babylonian kingdom, according to Winckler, later on became
Isin, then Larsa, &c. See ' Sumer und Akkad,'. in Mittheilungen
des Akad.-Orient. Vereins, vol. i. p. 6 ff . ; U. A. G. p. 65 ff. ;
Geschichte, p. 19 ff.
Lehmann, however, has called this opinion in question. According
to him, Shumer-Akkad had a geographical meaning as well as
a gentilic. See Shamashshumukin, p. 68 ff.
Two rulers, Ur-Gur and his son, combined those two hostile
elements of Shumer and Akkad under one sceptre, thus restoring
in Old Babylonia the peace which had been disturbed for many
centuries, nay, even from the time of the original Semitic invasion.
No wonder, then, that the later Assyrian kings should ascribe to
themselves this very same title. In this way they desired to pro-
claim themselves ' princes of peace,' doing justice to all classes of
men and to all nationalities. Ur-Gur's ' capital was situated in Ur
(Ur of the Chaldees). His greatness is seen in the building of
temples rather than in war' The temple Teimila of (*«i''>') Uru-
' No name in all Old Babylonian history has been read in as many ways
as this king's name. See Maspero, Dawn of Civilization, p. 617, note 1.
The name means ' the servant of the god GUH.'
His inscriptions :
i. R. J, No. i. s, 6, 7, 8, 9; Winckler, A. B. K. p. 8, No. 2r ; p. 9, Nos. 22,
23, 25, 26; and K. B. iii'. p. 78, Nos. 4, 8.
O. B. I. Nos. 14. 121, 122.
Comp. also 1. R. 68, No. i ; Peiser, K. B. iii', p. 95.
' If, however, we suppose that Ur-Gur II. is identical with Ur-Gur I. — which
may very well be possible (see Ur III.) — we would have to say that he was
first 'king of Ur,' and later on, in consequence of successful, wars, became also
' king of Shumer and Akkad.'
222 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
hi (i. e. Nannar, the moon-god) in Ur, and the temple Eanna (i. e.
' house of heaven ') of the goddess Innanna (i. e. Ishtar) in Uruk
(Warka), owe their origin to him. For Shamash (the sun-god) he
built the temple Ebarra at Larsa ; for Ninlil (the wife of Enlil) or
Belit, one at Nippur ; and for Enlil (BSl) he restored the old Ekur
(' house of the mountain ') which was built by Sargon I. and
Naram-Sin. See O. B. I. No. 121 :
(.Dingir) En-Ul For B^l,
lugal kur-kur-ra the king of the lands,
lugal-a-ni his king,
Ur-{dinsiy) Qiir Ur-Gur,
5 nita^ Hg-ga the mighty hero,
lugal Uru-um-'''-ma king of Ur,
lugal Ki-en-gi-^'-Urdu-ge king of Shumer and Akkad,
E-kur the Ekur,
e-ki-ag-ga-ni his beloved house,
10 mu-na-ru he has built.
and O. B. I. No. 122 :
Ur-(d'»gi'') Gur Ur-Gur,
lugal Uru-um-^'-ma king of Ur,
lugal Ki-en-gi-ti-Urdu king of Shumer and Akkad,
{ga)lu e {dingir) En-lil-laiJ) the one who the house of BSl
5 in-ru-a has built.
Also for the goddess Ninharsag he built or restored a temple ;
see O. B. I. No. 14 :
(Dir,gir) Nin-har-sag For Ninharsag,
nin-a-ni his mistress,
Ur-idingir) Gur Ur-Gur,
nita^ lig-ga the mighty hero,
5 lugal Vru-um-k'-via king of Ur,
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 223
lugal Ki-en-gi-'''-Urdu-ge king of Shumer and Akkad,
. . . AN-DUG + PA-Xn the . . ,,
\/\-ki-ag-ga-ni her beloved house,
mu-na-ru he has built.
According to Nabfl-na'id, Ur-Gur, as well as his son^ Dungi,
built also the E-lugal-gud-si-di, the zik-ktcr-rat of the temple
E-gii-lir-gal in Ur.
Ur-Gur was followed by his son Dungi ', who continued the work
of his father ; completed the sanctuaries of the moon-god, and the
Eanna of Ishtar ; erected temples in honour of Nin-Mar-J'' (i. e. the
' Before the sign AN, which is partly mutilated, something seems to have
been broken away, probably an A. The sign after ^A'' is not yet assimilated ;
it is DUG with an inserted PA, or better NAGID. As such it might mean
' the house of the good shepherd .'
^ So it was said above, p. 24. We may however be doubtful whether the
T)ungi mentioned by Nabii-nJ'id is really our Dungi here, for he calls Ur-Gur
only ' "sarru la majri,' without giving his full title. Assuming that he meant
Ur-Gur, 'king of Ur, king of Shumer and Akkad,' we are justified in calling
Dungi his son.
' Dungi, accoiding to Winckler, K. B. iii '. p. 80, note 3, = Semitic Ba'u-
ukln.
His inscriptions ;
Winckler, U. A. G. p. 157, g ; K. B. iii'. p. 69, 11.
Winckler, A. F. vi. p. 547, 8.
i. R. 2, ii. 1-4 ; Winckler, K. B. iii ^ p. 80, 1-4 ; A. B. K. p. 10, Nos. 28-31.
Mittheilungen des Akademisch-Orientalischen Vereins zu Berlin, i. p. 16 ;
Winckler, 1. c, p. 80, 5. Also published by Winckler, Altbabyl. ' Keilin-
schriften, No. 35. Nos. 2 and 3 are also to be found in C. J. Ball, Light from
the East, p. 63.
Lenormant, Textes in^dit. p. 163, No. 69; Winckler, 1. c. p. 83, 7
(doubtful).
C. T. 12217 (doubtful).
Collection de Clercq, No. 86 (?); Amiaud, Z. A. ii. p. 295.
O. B. I, Nos. 16, 123.
Die. pi. 28, I ; pi. 29, 3,4 = A. B. K. p. 11, Nos. 32, 33.
Dec. pi. 38, 4; Jensen, K. B. iii'. p. 70, No. 9; and above, p. 21.
Hommel, Geschichte, p. 334. Two patesis of Nippur (p. 30, i) dedicate
the seal to ^dingM Nusku, lu^-ma^, <.diHgir> En-lil-laiJ) for the life of
Dungi I.
(The inscription of Dnngi given above, p. 22, belongs to Dungi II.)
224 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
mistress of Mar) in Girsu ', of Nergal '^ in Kutha ", of Nin4 * and
of Ningirsu ° in Girsu.
To these should be added the Ekarzida of the goddess Nin-Uru-
um-^'-ma, i. e. the mistress of Ur ; see O. B. I. No. i6 :
{Dinsrir) JSfin-Uru-um-'''-ma For Nin-Ur,
nin-a-ni his mistress,
Dun-gt Dungi,
nitag-lig-ga the mighty hero,
5 lugal Uru-um-^'-ma king of Ur,
lugal Kt-en-gt-^'-Urdu'ge king of Shumer and Akkad,
e Kar-zi-da-ka-ni her house of KAR-ZI-DA
mu-na-ru he has built,
the temple of the goddess Dam-gal-nun^na, i. e. the great wife of
Nun or Ea, at Nippur; see O. B. I. No. 123 :
(Dingir) Ddm-gal-nun-tia For Damgalnunna,
nin-a-ni his mistress,
Dun-gi Dungi,
nitag-lig-ga the mighty hero,
5 lugal Uru-um-'''-ma king of Ur,
lugal Ki-en-gi-'^'-Urdu-ge king of Shumer and Akkad,
e-En-lil-'''-ka-ni her house in Nippur
mu-na-ru he has built.
and a temple for Ea himself (Winckler, A. F. p. 547, 8 = C. T.
i. 7287):
i^itgir) En-ki For Ea,
lugaha-ni his king,
' For her he built the Esalgilsa, i. e. according to Jensen, K. B. iii'. p. 29,
note * = i5ft sukutti, ' Schatzhaus.'
' Nergal is called here Sid-lam-ta-ud-du, and the temple which he built
the E-Shidlam. See Hommel, Gesch. p. 336 ff.
' For Kutha, written TIK-GAB-AM, see Delitzsch, Parad. p. 217 f.
* For her — called here the nin-in-dub-ba, nin-en, nin-a-ni, i. c. ' the mis-
tress of the art of writing'— he built the E-URU-URU-e-ga-ra, D^c. 29, 4;
Hommel, Geschichte, p. 321. For uru, comp. Jensen, K. B. iii '. p. 13, note 4.
' The Eninnfl, D^c. 29, 3.
EARLY BABYLON/AN HISTORY 225
Dun-gi Dungi,
lugal Uru-um-^'-ma king of Ur,
lugal Ki-en-gi-'^'-Urdu-ge king of Shumer and Akkad,
e-a-ni his house
mu-na-ru he has built.
The buildings erected in honour of different gods by Ur-Gur
and Dungi indicate that they held sway over the whole of Babylonia,
i. e. over Erech, Larsa, Girsu, Nippur, and Kutha.
Thus Ur-Gur and Dungi stand out as two mighty figures, the
ancestors ' of a long line of kings ruling over the Semites and
Sumerians, i. e. over Agade (Akkad) and Kengi (Shirpurla)— the
patesis of which latter city they reduced in course of time to utter
powerlessness (Gala-Lama, comp. above, p. 21).
At the present, however, we have no knowledge in regard to the
names either of their predecessors or their successors. It seems,
however, that these kings of Ur very soon lost Uruk or Warka, for
we find not long after their time certain kings calling themselves
lugal Unug-'"'-ga lugal Am-na-nu-um, i.e. king of Erech, king of
Amnanu ^.
Kings of Srech.
Two rulers belong to this latter dynasty, SingSshid' and
SingSmil * Both bear pure Semitic names.
' Or successors ?
^ Lehmann (Zwei Probleme), Winckler, and Hommel put this dynasty after
Ur IV.
^ Probably^ (*') Sin-kcHid, ' Sin exalteth ' ; comp. Nabfl-na'id.
His inscriptions :
i. R. 2, No. viii. i, 2 ; Winckler, K. B. iii". p. 82, i, 2 ; and A. B. K. Nos.
38, 39-
iv. R. 35, 2 ; Winckler, 1. c. p. 84, 3 ; comp. also Babylonian and Oriental
Records, i. pp. 8-11, and Winckler, A. B. K, Nof. 40 and 41.
• (*') Sin-gAmil= ' Sin spares, protects.' His inscription :
British Museum, 82, 7-14, 181 ; Winckler, K. B. iii'. p. 84 b.
To this period also belongs :
M&ant, Glyptique orient, i. p. 104, table iii. i; Winckler, ibid. p. 84 ;
Hommel, Geseh. p. 206 ; A. B. K. No. 42 ; and O. B. I. 26 ; comp. Hommel,
A. H. T. p. 129, and Winckler, A. F. p. 274,
Q
226 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
That we should find kings with such pure Semitic names in
Southern Babylonia (Erech) at this time (about 3100 and 3000 B.C.)
is undoubtedly the result of uniting under one sceptre the
Semitic population in the north with the more or less Sumerian in
the south. Semites had free intercourse, during the reign of the
kings of Kengi-ki-Urdu, with the Sumerians, and could move
freely throughout their dominions. Thus they would settle down
in the most southern part of Babylonia, and in process of time
make themselves independent kings, taking for their capital Erech,
and erecting there their royal palace : e-gal nam-lugal-la-ka-ni mu-ru
says (<''"/?'''') Sin-ga-lid, i. R. 2, viii. 2. SingSshid, therefore, was
probably the founder of this dynasty. They were, however, not
content with Erech alone, but tried to extend their power further
toward!;-, the east over Amnanum; of which country they eventually
Jjfi^Sme kings.
Winckler's theory, Mittheil. des Akad.-Orient. Vereins, p. 13, that
at this time there existed ihree kingdoms in Old Babylonia, viz.
(i) the kingdom of Babel in the north,
(2) the kingdom of Shumer anc/ Akkad in the south, and
(3) the kingdom of Amnanujp^ith the capital Erech, situated
between that of Bab|l^nH Shumer and Akkad,
is undoubtedly wron^^fl^Tias been shown by Lehmann, Shamash-
shumuWn, ppwi^^^nd 75 fT., according to whom Amnanum is '««
an Babylonien avgrenzender elamitischer Bezirk! So also Hommel,.
Geschichte, p. 342.
Besides erecting his royal residence, Singashid repaired the
temple Eanna of Ishtar (see. Ur-Gur and Dungi I.), and built that
of Kankal in honour of Lugalbanda and Ninsun his wife.
(Din^ir) Sin-ga-mi-il is only known from an inscription of a certain
AN-A-AN-Gis-dub-ba\ the son of Nab-se-me-a^, who records
that he ' for the life of Singamil ' built a temple for Nergal *, lugal
' Has probably to be pronounced IlH-ma-Gisdubba.
" This Nab-U-me-a is also mentioned in a tablet published by Hilprecht,
O. B. I. 26 ; see also his Assyriaca, where he is said to be the father of
' Written (.dingir) NER-UNU-GAL, K. B. iii ^
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 227
u-ur {?)-ra-h' (i.e., according to Winckler, ' Konig der Unter-
weli').
It is impossible to translate with Winckler, 1. c. p. 85 c, the
inscription of a seal-cylinder published by M^nant, Glypt. orient, i.
p. 104, C. J. Ball, Light from the East, p. 45, as follows: —
BIL-GUR- {Dir, 0) Bil-gur-ahi,
aht{/) hr Konig
Urug-^' von Uruk,
a certain DINGIR-A-AN' {'pionoMnoeA M-ma). Hommel, A. H. T. p. 130,
thinks that IlH-ma is only an abbreviation of Il-U-ma-Giidubba ('God is
Giidubba ' = GilgamisK). That inscription reads :
Dingir-a-an IIA ma,
ab-ba {=^tbu, Br. 3821) ki-su-lu-ku-gar the sheikh of the people
= umm&nu, Br. 9649, H. W. B. p. 87)
Unug-ki-ga-gt of Erech,
dumu Nab4e-me-a the son of Nabshemea,
bad Unug-ki-ga the wall of Erech,
nin-dim- dim-ma (Br. 12141) an old building
labar-ra (Br. 9463)
(dingir) Gis-bil-ga-7nii-ge of Gilgamish (comp. C. T. 94-10-
16, 4, obv., ii. ; GIR UrA^ingir)
Gi{J)-bil-ga-mii dumu Al-la)
ki-bi ne-in-gl-a has restored.
If IlA-via= IM-ma-Giidubba, we would have here the first example of an
abbreviated name. Such examples occur especially very often in Neo-Baby-
lonian contract-tablets. Winckler, A. T. p. 274, who misread the last sign
in line 3 {fi or mil for ge, comp. 1. 7), transcribed that line URU-KI-ga-mil
(URU-KI=Nannar=Siii), i.e. Singamil, thus making Singamil, who is not
said here to be a king, the son of Nabshemea. The sign, however, is clear.
IlA-ma or IlA-ma-Giidubba was apparently only a general in the royal army
of Erech, and as such he restores the wall of the royal capital, fortifying it
against its enemies. Winckler, 1. c, translated our inscription : ' Der Gottheit
A-AN, dem dllesUn der Xiinstler, hat Sin-gamil, Sohn des Nabshemea, Uruk,
den alten Bau des Cilgamesh wieder erbaut.' Hommel also wants to identify
this IlH-ma or {IlH-ma-Giidubba) with the well-known IlA-ma-ilu (or also
written only IlA-ma) of dynasty B of Babylon, thus making—
1. The sheikh of the people of Erech also king of Babylon ;
2. This dynasty of Erech to have existed at the time of Babylon B, which
latter, however, he thinks to be apocryphal, with the exception of just this
IlA-ma-ilu, whom he puts somewhere at the beginning of dynasty A. ' Aber
das glaube wer will ! '
Q 2
328 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
dup-sar der Schreiber
5 iri-zu dein Diener.
If ahi were a part of the name of the king, it could not be
separated from Bil-gur by a line ! Hence Bil-gur-ahi is no king
of Uruk, but 'a brother' of a ktng^ of Erech. It has to be
translated ; —
O Bil-gur,
brother (ahu) of the king
of Erech,
the scribe
is thy servant.
We have scarcely realized the existence of a Semitic kingdom in
Southern Babylonia before we are compelled again to leave it in
darkness. The name of the kingdom disappears, and the title
Itigal Amnanum is borne by no other king up to the time of
Shamashshumukin (669-647 b.c), who accepts this title again,
apparently as a reminiscence of ancient days '.
Kings of Isin.
The uniting of the Sumerian and Semitic population at the time
of Ur-Gur I. and Dungi I. brought with it another calamity. The
independence of Erech under Singashid was soon paralleled by
that of Isin ^, a little further to the north, apparently also under
Semitic rulers. These kings, at first* ruling only over Isin,
extended their dominion over Nippur, Ur, Eridu, and Erech, thus
putting an end to the dynasty of the last-named city ". From
their bearing the title na-gid Uru-um-'^'-ma, it is evident that the
' See also Lehmann, Zwei Probleme, p. 175, note 3, and Z. D. M. G. 49,
p. 309 f.
' Lehmann, Shamashshumnkin, i. p. 75; Winckler, A. F. pp. 231, 232.
' The situation of Isin is not yet made out, but comp. for the present Delitzsch,
Parad. pp. 190, 225. It probably has to be sought near the Shatt-el-Kehr,
between Uruk and Nippur ; see Hommel, Geschichte, p. 474. For the pro-
nunciation of Ni-si-in-ki-{nci) ssXiwij see Bezold, Z. A. iv. p. 430.
* Comp. the title of the different rulers.
' Hence we have to put the dynasty of Erech before that of Isin, contrary
to Lehmann, Zwei Probleme, p. 175.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 229
second dynasty of Ur had by this time ceased to exist. Nay,
further, they even took the title originally held by Ur-Gur I. and
Dungi I., calling themselves ' king of Shumer and Akkad.' By this
step they proclaimed their intention of dealing out equal justice to
Sumerians and Semites alike, to ' Jew and Gentile,' thus once more
seeking to appease any hostile feeling between these two nations.
The first king with the title ' king of Isin, king of Shumer and
Akkad,' is Libit- Anunit \ If the inscription of a cylinder published
by Scheil in R. T. xix. p. 48, belongs to this Libit-Anunit, this
latter king would be the son of a certain la-lu-un-a-sar. That
inscription reads : —
Li-bi-it-Anunii To Libit-Anunit,
apil la-lu-un-a-sar"^ the son of lalunashar,
Ardi-^'^"^ Na-bi-um Ardi-Nabium (presents this).
Another ruler with the title 'king of Isin' only' is mentioned on
a much mutilated tablet published in iv. R'. 35, 7. The name
of this king has been generally read W''gi'') Ts-bi-gir-ra. Against
this reading Scheil, Rec. de Trav. xix. p. 48, says : ' Protesions id
contre la lecture libi-Girra du nom du prince d! Isin. . . . Cette lecture
est errone'e el doit ^tre modifide en Isgas-Girra, cest-h-dire " Girra a
assommi" {verbe sagasu),' see H. W. B. p. 687. He also mentions
in corroboration of this reading a name ligum-Girra, ' le dieu
Girra a rugi' (-v/ sagdmu). But against the reading of Is-gas
is to be said that the praet. of sagdsu is not isgas but isgis.
'■ Also read Libit-Ishtar. Libit-Anunit =' the work of Anunit.'
His inscriptions ;
i. R. 5, No. xviii ; Winckler, K. B. ill', p. 86 6 (where 1. 11, lu^at Ki-en-gi-
ki-Urdu, is left out!); A. B. K. p. 14, No. 44.
Scheil, Rec. de Trav. xix. p. 48, 3.
^ To this name Scheil, 1. c, remarks : ' Yalunaiar tia pas rasped babylo-
nien. Une lecture Yalunasar serait igahment correcie. Yalun fourrait Urt
le fhinicien ElSn. Atar, asar rendrait-il Varamien asar pour Assur, Osir,
ou celui qui est ind&ment employi dans Salman-asar, Tiglalpil-asar V
^ Should this (dineir) Is-bi-gir-ra belong to another later dynasty ? If so,
I would like to put him after Ur IV. and before Babylon I. His title would
speak strongly in favour of this view.
230 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
A third king belonging to this dynasty is Ur-Ninib \ He calls
himself (O. B. I. No. 18):—
(.Dingir) jjy.{dingir) ]Sfin-ib Ur-Ninib,
sib nin-nam-ila the glorious shepherd
En-lil-'^i of Nippur,
na-gid the shepherd
5 Uru-um-^'-ma of Ur,
me-sH-il he who delivers the commands
Urudug-k'-ga of Eridu,
en se-ga the gracious lord
Unug-^'-ga of Erech,
10 lugal Ni-si-in-'''-na kingoflsin,
lugal Kt-en-gi-'''-Urdu king of Shumer and Akkad,
dam igi-il-la the beloved husband
{dingir) Jnnanna of Ishtar.
2. =rl'u tanaddti.
. 4. =«<JA?V«, Hebr.lpJ.
6. me-'iuM corresponds here to mi-a-tum-ma in O. B. I. 19, 6 ; /«/« and // =
abdlu, ' to bring, deliver.'
7. Read also EridugM-ga,
1 2. igi-il-la = «zH/ ^«({.
Among these kings of Isin has also to be placed a so-called
Bur-Sin I *
' Thus this name has to be pronounced, Hilprecht, O. B. I. p. 27, and in
Z. A. vii. p. 315, note i.
His inscriptions :
iv. R. 35, 5 ; Winckler, K. B. iii *. 84 a, identical with O. B. I. No. 18 ; see
Hilprecht, 1. c. p. 27 : ' i. R. 5, No. xxiv, erroneously ascribed to Ishme-Dagan,
is obviously the lower half of this same legend.'
" He is called Bur-Sin 1. to distinguish him from another Bur-Sin II. of the
fourth dynasty of Ur. Although the pronunciation of these two names is the
same, yet the writing is not. In Bur-Sin I. the sign BUR is that of Br. 6971,
while in Bur-Sin II. it is written with Br. 9068 : biiru = amar. The former
is only the phonetic writing for the latter. Both mean, according to Delitzsch
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 23 1
The inscription of Bur-Sin I., published in O. B. I. No. 19,
reads : —
(din^ir) _Bur-i'''»r''r) Sin Bur-Sin,
sii sag En-lil-^' dug-dug the good shepherd of Nippur,
engar-lig-ga the powerful shepherd
Uru-um-^i-ma of Ur,
5 gis-kin Urudug-^'-ga kt-bi-gl the restorer of the oracle tree of
Eridu,
en me-a-tum-ma the lord who delivers the com-
mands
Unug-^'-ga of Erech,
lugal Ni-si-in-'''-na king of Isin,
lugal Kt-en-gi-f''-Urdu king of Shumer and Akkad,
10 dam me-le-ma ?-azag idingir) the glorious . . . husband of
Innanna Ishtar.
2. The dug-dug apparently belongs to sib, and corresponds to the Hin-nam-
il-la in Ur-Ninib. DUG a\so — 'iM-=gitmalu, ' perfect.'
3. engar = ikkaru = 'Re:hr. 13N ; comp. Hilpr. O. B. I. p. 28, note 3.
J. ¥ or gis-kin, see Jensen, Kosmol. pp. 99 ff., 249 note.
6. For this line, see Ur-Ninib, 1. 6.
10. The me-te-ma ?-azag corresponds to the igi-il-la in Ur-Ninib and the
ki-ag in Ishme-Dagan ; see Winckler, K. B. iii'. p. 84 a, 1. 12, and p. 86 d,
1. 10. Corap. also the me-ad-asag in D^c. 37, 8.
It is more than probable that a certaiij (*«f«*') Idin (*«.f''') Dagan
(='Dagan judgeth'), whom Hilprecht (R. R. B. L,, p. 84) refers
to the fourth dynasty of Ur, belongs to the kings of Isin, on
account of the r6le which Shumer and Akkad plays in his inscrip-
tion. Unfortunately the tablet is so greatly mutilated that hardly
any coherent sense can be made out of it. Besides that it has
(B. A. ii. p. 622), 'the son of Sin.' Better probably is the rendering, 'a
yonng ox is Sin.' For a different reading of this name, see Lehmann, B. A.
ii. p. 598 ff.
His inscriptions :
O. B. I. No. 19 ; comp. Hilprecht, ibid. p. 28.
Lehmann, B. A. ii. p. 598 ff.
232
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
been published by Scheil in Neo-Assyrian characters — a habit
which ought to be discontinued once for all, for it cuts off all
control. The inscription is in the form of a dedication ending
with a prayer for Idin-Dagan. It has been published in R. T.
xvi. p. 187 ff. (1894), and reads :
Obverse.
I dub-ba-us-sa se-gi , . .
Ki-en-gi-'''-Urdii an-kus dagal . . .
kalam-e ii nir-gal KA-sa-ne- . . ,
(dingir) En-lil-li id-bi mu-da- . . .
5 (dingir) i-din-^di^gir') Da-gan sib
sag-ga . . .
gu-zi-de-a W'V''-) En-lil . . .
(dingir) En-ki-ge gis-tug{-pi)
dagal nin- . . .
kin igi-gal gi-ka uk ia . . .
(dingir) J-din-^dingir) Da-gan . . .
10 kur-kur-ri . . .
dumu ii-tu-da (*"i'''-) , . .
(dingir) I-din-'^^'^S'*'^ Da-gan . . .
The younger (?) brother, the
one who overpowers . . .
Shumer and Akkad, the great
protection (or protector .?) of . . .
of the lands, the wise hero,
who . . ,
of Enlil, who on his side . . .
To Idin-Dagan, the shepherd
called by the true heart of . . .
the true prophet of Enlil . . .
by Enki, to whom great intel-
ligence was given by . . .
the circumspect one, the wise
one, to whom a sceptre of . . .
To Idtn-Dagan, the . . .
of the lands . . .
a son, born by . . .
to Idtn-Dagan . . .
Comp.
Obv. 1, dub-ba-ui-sa, Br. y)i^2=duppussil, 'younger' (?) brother.
H. W. B. 226; Shalm. Black Ob. 74; and Z. A. i. p. 392.
se-gi, Br. 4404 ; sapdnu, H. W. B. 508.
i. an-kus, Br. 6368 ; salAlu and salmu.
3. -A, Br. 6024 ; Uu, nir-gU, Br. 6290, elellu.
£ . Probably zipad-da (dingir) ... to be added,
6. gu-de-a=ndbiu ; zi=klnu.
7. nin-ba sum-ma {dingir) , . . This line probably continued.
8. kin, Br. 10754; J«V«; igi-gcd, Br. 9306; mudu, A. L'. 253; igigallu,
• offenaugig, allwissend' ; gi-ka, Br. 2413 ; Hbtu, H. W. B. 638. For uk, see
Br, 3862 ; ^arru and uk-dur, ibid. = maliku.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
233
zal-li nin . . .
(dingir) £„.
Ki-en-gi . . .
(dingir) /.^^„ (^dingir) Da-gatl
nin-dug-ga . . .
inim-ma (di«gir') . , ,
5 ka-la ud-du-a-zu W"S''') . .
dug-ga (dingir) £fi. _ . ,
igi-lar-ra-zu {gd)lu mu-un .
ka-ba-zu {ga)lu mu-un- . .
dug-ga-a-ZU idingir) EN-
GUBUR-\RA\ . . .
10 sag-gi-gin-zu (*«^'r) NIN-
GUBVR-RA . . .
sii (dingir-) EN-GUBUR-RA
Hi . . .
the hero .
of (by) En ,
Reverse.
Shumer [and Akkad]
Idin-Dagan . . .
thy commands may be . . .
the words of . . .
what goeth out of thy mouth
may . . .
the commands of En- . . .
what thy eyes look upon, a man
may . . .
when thy mouth openeth itself,
a man may . . .
thy commands EN-GUBUR-
RA may . . .
the desires of thy heart NIN-
GUBUR-RA may . . .
[thou art] the shepherd of EN-
GUBUR-RA,the2ihax3kk\x of. . .
13. zal-li, Br, 5328; zikaru.
Rev. 3. nin-dug-ga, Br. 532 ; kibttu.
4. inim-ma, Br. 508 ; amdtu.
5. ka-ta ud-du-a — sit pi-ka.
8. ka-ba=ptt pt, Br. £65.
10. For SAG-gi-DU (=^2'»), comp. Br. 8008 ; SAG-GI {=gin)-na-l>iiil
libbi, H. W. B. 166.
11. iti='&i. 9427, abarakku. For (dingir) EN {2caA especially NIN)-
GUBUR-RA, see Br. 6225 and 6176.
The last king of the dynasty of Isin is C*".?^''') Is-me-i^'^s'''')
Da-gan '. Nothing besides his titles is known of him.
Fragmentary as the inscriptions of the kings of Isin are, they
' The name means, ' Dagan hears.'
i. R. 2, No. 5, I and 2 ; Winckler, K. B. iii'. p. 86 d.
O. B. I. No. 17 : a fragment, which gives only the name of this ruler.
234 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
however suffice to show that Libit-Anunit probably was the first,
and Ishme-Dagan the last ruler. Of how many members this
dynasty consisted, and how one succeeded the other, are questions
which still await an answer. The kings of Isin were at length
succeeded by the rulers of the third dynasty of Ur, headed by
Gungunu.
The Third Dynasty of Ur.
The kings of this dynasty, in contradistinction to those of the
second, always call themselves or are called ' king of Ur.'
Gungunu, the founder of this dynasty, put an end to that of Isin,
for Enannatum, the son of Ishme-Dagan, built several temples
' for the life of Gungunu, the mighty hero, the king of Ur ' ; hence
the son of Ishme-Dagan sat no more on the throne of Isin, but
acknowledged openly his dependence on the king of Ur, applying
to himself only religious titles (K. B. iii^ p. 87, 4, i, 2)^
On account of the difference in the titles of Gungunu and, e. g.,
Bur-Sin II. on one hand and Dungi I. on the other, we have to
distinguish between the second, the third, and the fourth dynasties
of Ur. This has already been hinted at above, p. 37, note 2.
Reserving for the present a full discussion of Winckler's theory
(see O. L. Z. i. 238), we shall go on with the enumeration of
the other kings, who are called or call themselves ' king of Ur '
only.
Besides Gungunu '', two other kings bear the title lugal Uru-um-
'^'-ma, viz., Ur-Gur II. and Dungi II. — so called by us, to distinguish
them from Ur-Gur I. (second dynasty of Ur) and Dungi III.
(fourth dynasty of Ur). Whether Ur-Gur II. preceded Dungi II.
is not certain, nor do we know whether the latter is the immediate
successor of the former.
' Comp. i. R. 2, No. vi. i ; 36, No. 2 ; and A. B. K. 47, (i) and (2),
^ Does the date mentioned by Scheil, R. T. xxi. 125 : mu Gv,-im-gu-nu ba-
til, i. e. ' the year when Gungunu died,' belong to Gungunu, king of Ur ? Schiel
remarks to that date : Que signifie, dans notre cas, V absence de tout litre ? Ce
prince avait-il usurpi la royauti ? ou, sur la fin de sa vie, avait-il perdii la
souveraineti , mais non la popularity ?
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 235
Ur-Gur II.' built for (*'«,?'■'') Uru-h' {= Nannar-Sin, the moon-
god of Ur) the temple Te-im-ila ^ and for i'i'»£'» Lugal-dingir-
ri-ne (i. e. for the god who is the ' king of the gods ') the temple
Nun-mag. He was in possession of the city Ishkun-Sin — the
situation of which is not yet made out — for its patesi, Hashhamir,
acknowledges, in an inscription to be found on a seal-cylinder,
that he is the ' servant of Ur-Gur, king of Ur ' (see above, p. 30,
note I, and C. J. Ball, Light from the East, p. 50).
The enemies of Ur must have been troublesome, for Ur-Gur II.
finds it necessary to fortify the wall of his royal capital (^ai^ Uru-
um-'^'-ma mu-na-ru, K. B. iii'- p. 76 a, 2).
The third king who belongs to this dynasty is Dungi 11." Of
this king we possess no inscriptions written ly himself, he being
known only from votive inscriptions of certain patesis or other
people, who dedicated those inscribed tablets ' for the life of Dungi,
king of Ur.'
Among the patesis who thus acknowledged their dependence
upon Dungi II. are to be found :
' It seems, however, more probable that Ur-Gur II. is the same as Ur-Gur I.
(see sub Ur II.). The inscriptions in which Ur-Gur is called 'king of Ur ' only
are the following ; —
1. R. I, No. I, I =A. B. K. No. 17 ; Winckler, K. B. iii'. p. 76 a, No. i ;
also in C. J. Ball, Light from the East, p. 63.
i. R. I, No. I, 3 =A. B. K. No. 19; Winckler, K. B. iii '. p. 76 a, No. 2.
i. R. I, No. 1, 4=A. B. K. No. 20; „ ,, „ No. 3.
iv. R. 35, I =A. B. K. No. 27 ; „ „ p. 78, No. 9.
i. R. 1, I, No. 10 = A. B. K. No. 24; „ „ p. 80, No. 10.
'' This temple was also built by Ur-Gur I. ; see K. B. iii'. p. 78, 4. Notice
the difference in the titles of god Nannar and Ur-Gur respectively.
' His inscriptions :
iv. R. 35, No. 3 =A. B. K. No. 36 ; Winckler, K. B. iii>. p. 82, 8 ; Amiaud,
Z. A. ii. p. 292.
O. B. I. No. 15 ; Hilprecht, ibid. p. 31.
C. T. Part V. No. 12218 =U. A. G. p. 157, 9; Jensen, K. B. iii'. p. 68, ii.,
and above, p. 37.
R. A. Iv. iv. p. 90; above, p. 22.
C. T. 12217 (doubtful, because ' for Dungi ' only).
Lenormant, Textes inedits, p. 163, No. 69; Winckler, K. B. iii'. p. 82, 7
(doubtful, because Dungi has no title).
236
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
{a) (Ga)lukani, a patesi of Shirpurla, who presented his tablet
to Ningirsu; see above, p. 22.
{b) A certain Si-a-ium (O. B. I. No. 15), who dedicated his
inscription to goddess Ishtar for the life of his sovereign. This
latter tablet being interesting in more than one respect, we give
its transcription and translation here (comp. also Hilprecht, O. B. I.
P- 31)-
O. B. I. No. 15, obverse (written in Sumerian).
{dingir) Jnnanna
nin-a-ni
nam-ti
Dun-gi
niiag lig-ga
lugal Uru-um-^'-ma-ka-ku
Si-a-ium
.... -ni
[a-mu-na-sui]
Unto Ishtar,
his mistress,
for the life of
Dungi,
the mighty hero,
king of Ur,
Siatum
[the . . . . of . . . .J«z'
[has presented it].
Reverse ; see O. B. I. No. 43 (written in Semitic).
Ku-ri-gal-zu
sar Ka-{u)ru-du-nt-ia-as
ekalla (E-GAL) ia («'«) &a-a-sa->''
U Elamii [NIM-MAy^i
ik-lu-ud-ma
a-na (''«) Beltum (NIN-LIL)
be-el-ti-su
a-na la-la-ti {pi)-iu
i-ki-is
Kurigalzu,
king of Karduniash,
from the palace of Susa
in Elam
has taken, and
to Belit,
his mistress,
for his life
has presented (this tablet).
' This tablet,' to use Hilprecht's words, ' tells its own story.
Siatum presented it for the life of Dungi, king of Ur. At the time
of the Elamite invasion, Kudurnanhundi carried the image of the
goddess Ishtar, with all that belonged or was dedicated to it, into
Elam. Kurigalzu, of the Cassite dynasty, after he had conquered
Susa, brought it back and presented it to B^lit of Nippur. There,
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 237
in the sanctuary of BSlit, it remained till it was again taken by the
excavators at Nippur and transferred to the Museum of the Uni-
versity of Pennsylvania.'
Among the other persons who dedicated tablets to certain gods
' for the life of Dungi, king of Ur,' are to be found :
[a) Ki-lul-la-gu-za-lal, the son of a certain Ur-Ba-M (= Ur-
Bavi = Ur-Ba'i),\AiO presented a seal-cylinder to ^^'"S''"') ^id-lam-
ia-ud-du^ lugal a zi-da ^tr-pur-la-^'-ge (iv. R. 35, No. 2 ; Hommel,
Geschichte, p. 336).
{b) ¥i»eir) Ba-u-nin-a-an, who made the ZABAR-KU of Ur-
{dingir) JSfin-gir-su to be a d^I-LI (ornament) for Ninlil {Belli) ;
see above, p. 37. It is interesting to note that Ur-Ningirsu,
mentioned here, has exactly the same title as the one mentioned
in D^c. 37, No. 8, and Revue Arch. 1886, pi. 7, No. 2, viz.
en ki-ag {H-^eir) Nind-ka-ge ; they are one and the same person, and
must therefore also be differentiated from Ur-Ningirsu, patesi of
Shirpurla ; see above, p. 37 (d).
' For Shidlamtauddu = Nergal, see Winckler, K. B. iii '. p. 80, 5, and Hom-
mel, Geschichte, p. 336 ff. The god Shidlamtanddu is also mentioned in C. T.
1 2 2 1 7, which reads ;
(dinsir) Sid-lam-ta-ud-du-a Unto Shidlamtanddu,
dingir-a-ni his god,
{Ca)lu-ligir-e { = (aniSl) JSTdgirbtti, the N^gir-biti
Br. 6968)
nam-ti for the life
Dun-gi-ku of Dungi
a-mu-na-tub has presented it.
Who this Dungi was, we cannot tell.
It should be noticed here that it was Dungi I. who built for Shidlamtanddu
a temple called E-SID-LAM, which temple was situated in TIK-GAB-A-ki
( = Kutha) ; see K. B. iii'. p. 80, 5. Nergal, whose original home was in the
north (Kutha) — time of Dungi I.— was made later on also lugal A-zi-da of
Shirpurla — time of Dungi II. (Comp. also time of Ur IV., C. T. 17758, iii. 10,
and ibid. 94-10-15, 3, obv., ii. 16: a-'iag (drngir) Nin-gir-su A-zi-da (dingir)
Nind.) . This undoubtedly was the result of the imiting of the north and south
of Babylonia under one sceptre (comp. Ur II. and Isin). Even Dnngi III. in
a Semitic inscription reports that he built, or better, rebuilt, the same temple
of Nergal ; see K. B. iii'. p. 82, 6.
238 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
The Fourth Dynasty of TJr.
Before we go over to the fourth dynasty of Ur, headed by
another Dungi— called by us Dungi III. — it would seem necessary
to say a few words with regard to the theory of Winckler in
O. L. Z. i. 238, viz. that all three rulers bearing the name Dungi
are one and the same person, thus making the second, third, and
fourth dynasties of Ur only one, i. e. the second.
Winckler bases his theory upon the following arguments : —
1. Dungi, ' king of Ur, king of Shumer and Akkad,' must be
the same as Dungi, ' king of Ur, king of the four corners of the
world,' ' da die beiden Inschriften ' welche von Bauten Dungts am
Nergaltempel in Kuiha sprechen, und in deren beiden er die beiden
Titulaturen fUhrt, nur von einer Person herriihren konnen.'
2. ' Die gleichzeitigen Patesis von Lagdi erweisen die Ideniitdt
beider Personen: vgl. die Angaben Thureau-Dangiri s oben, Sp. 172,
1 73-'
On this place referred to by Winckler, Thureau-Dangin men-
tions two tablets :
(a) R. T. xviii. pp. 73, 74, where a seal-inscription to be found
on a tablet dated iiu SE-IL-LA mu en Eridug-^' ba-a-tug has
the following legend : —
{dingiri Utu-a dumu Ur-
dup-sar
[Gd)lu-ka-ni
pa-te-si
Sir-ptir-la-'''
(See also above, p. 211.)
{b) R. A. iv., iv. p. 90 (see above, p. 22), where a certain (Ga)lu-
kani, patesi of Shirpurla, dedicates an inscription to Ningirsu for
the life of ' Dungi, king of Ur'
' These are K. B. iii'. p. 80, 5, and ibid. p. 82, 6. See also note on pre-
ceding page.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 239
I. A careful examination of Winckler's position exhibits the
most careless and illogical argument.
Let us begin with statement No. 2 : ' The contemporary patesis
of Lagash prove the identity of both persons,' the persons being :
' Dungi, king of Ur, king of Shumer and Akkad/ and ' Dungi,
king of Ur, king of the four corners of the world ' (see above
sub i) ; their contemporary patesi of Lagash is said to be
(i) (Ga)]ukani, (2) Gudea and Ur-Ningirsu (so also Lehmann,
Zwei Probleme, p. 176, and Winckler, U. A. G. p. 35; see above,
p. 34. The two inscriptions referred to by Winckler and quoted
above sub {a) and (b) do not say a single word that {Ga)lukani
was either a contemporary 0/ ' Dungi, king of Ur, king of Shumer
and Akkad ^ or of '■ Dungi, king of Ur, king of the four corners of
the world! But let us examine those two inscriptions more closely.
From the inscription quoted sub (b), only this much can be
derived : (Ga)lukani was a contemporary of a certain ' Dungi,
king of Ur.' Apparently Winckler bids us to believe — without any
arguments on his part — that the plain title ' king of Ur ' is the same
as ' king of Ur ' plus ' king of Shumer and Akkad,' or plus
' king of the four corners of the world.' Here lies the fallacy of
Winckler's theory. As long as Winckler does not see fit to prove
either the one or the other, just so long our objection holds. But
what does Winckler do with Gungunu, king of Ur? Does this
latter ruler's title also imply a dominion over Shumer and Akkad,
or even over the four corners of the world ? ' No,' he informs us,
' Gungunu isi beiseite zu stellen, und wir haben in ihm nichts anderes
zu sehen, als einen Konigssohn, der mit oder gegen den Willen seines
Voters in Ur ein Stadtkonigtum besass.' If Gungunu is permitted
by Winckler's graciousness to possess a ' Stadtkonigtum^ may we
not righdy ask, why is he so hard on Dungi, king of Ur, whom
he not only denies a ' Stadtkonigtum^ but whom he even wipes
out of existence ? No, if Gungunu was ' king of Ur ' and possessed
a ' Stadtkonigtum ' — as the title attributed to him by Enannatum
indicates — then Dungi, king of Ur, as well as Ur-Gur(?)\ king of
' See note I on p. 235.
240 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
Ur, have to be classed together with Gungunu, i. e. they too were
kings of Ur and possessed a ' Stadtkonigtum!
Or does Winckler' think, with Thureau-Dangin (O. L. Z. i.
172 and 174, i.), that the title 'king of Ur' to be found in con-
nection with Dungi II. is ' une formule simplemeni abr^g& ' ? If
so, how is it with Gungunu's title ? Thureau-Dangin, 1. c. p. 174, i.,
tells us : ' Gungunu auraii rekvi le Htre de roi d Ur a une /poque
tres posierieure aux rot's classes jusquici dans la " seconde {main-
tenant la troisieme') dynastie d'Ur," ' thus making Gungunu belong
to another dynasty. May we not ask here, too, if the title ' king of
Ur' in Gungunu's case is not '■une formule simplement abreg/e,'
why should it be in Dungi's case ? No, the title ' king of Ur ' cannot
be an abbreviation. For —
I. In votive inscriptions, where one person dedicates something
for the life of a king, the person thus dedicating is always careful
to give the exact and complete titles of his king.
Dungi, 'king of Ur, king of the four corners of the world,'
belongs to the same dynasty as Bur-Sin II., Gimil-Sin, and
Ine-Sin.
Among all the votive and seal inscriptions so far published and
known to me, I have not yet found a single inscription where
Bur-Sin II., or Gimil-Sin, or Ine-Sin are simply called ' king of
Ur \' And as long as we have no inscriptions proving that, e. g.,
' But I have found votive and seal inscriptions giving always the full titles
of Bur-Sin II. and the other rulers. Comp. for Bur-Sin II., R. A. iv. pi. xxxi.
No. 80 :
I. (dingir) Bur-(di"-gir) Sin
nitag lig-ga
lugal Uru-iim-ki-ma
lugal an ub-da tai-iab-ba
II. Nam-ga-ni lug
duniu UD (?) a-a-niu
nita^-zu
For Gimil-Sin, comp. iv. R. 35, 4 ; i. R. 3, No. xi. ; K. B. iii'. p. 90, 3, and
R. A. iv. pi. xxxi. No. 81 :
I. (.ditigir) Gimil (dmgir) Sin
lugal lig-ga
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 241
' Bur-Sin, king of Ur, king of the four corners of tlie world,' is
equal to ' Bur-Sin, king of Ur,' just so long we are nol justified
in making ' Dungi,- king of Ur,' equal to ' Dungi, king of Ur, king
of the four corners of the world.'
2. It is a well-known fact that kings, in their inscriptions, were
rather inclined to use the most comprehensive titles, thus claiming
dominion over a greater territory than they really possessed. This,
e.g., was the reason why the kings of Kish would express this
latter title by ' lugal Kd ' or ' Ur Kit; without KI, while their
contemporary kings or patesis of Shirpurla always term them
lugal Kih^'. They wanted to claim silently a dominion over the
universe (= Kti = hlUiu), while the kings of Shirpurla simply
narrowed the title down to a ' Stadtkoniglum' {sar Kts-^').
Hence a king, if he were ' king of Shumer and Akkad,' and even
' king of the four corners of the world,' would surely prefer these
latter titles before that of ' king of Ur ' only, especially if he him-
self were enumerating his own titles.
lugal Uru-ttinM-ma
lugal-an-ub-da tab-tab- ha
II. Eri-idingir). Uru-ki = Ardi-Nannar (Sin)
lug-mag
dumu Ur-'jl'''S''') Dun-pa-ud-du
nitag-zu
or Ine-Sin, comp. R. A. iv. pi. xxxi. No. 82 :
I. (dingir) I-ne-^drngir) Sin
lugal lig-ga
lugal Uru-um-ti-ma
— break —
II. {Ga)lu-(dingir) Ntn-gir-su
dup-sar
dumu {Ga)lu-idi"gir) Ba-lu}
pr ibid. :
I. (dingir) I-neAdingir) Sin
lugal lig-ga
lugal Uru-um-ki-ma
lugal an-ub-da tab-tab-ba
II. {Ga)lu-idingir) LAGAB + iaseited IGI-gunH LU&
nita^-zu
For Dungi, see E. A. H. 61, further below, and R. T. xviii. p. 73.
R
242 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
Perhaps some one might say, the different titles which Dungi
bears clearly indicate the development in the history of his time,
he being first ' king of Ur,' and in consequence of some successful
wars became 'king of Shumer and Akkad,' and later on even
' king of the four corners of the world.' This might be possible.
In that case we would, however, have to imagine that Ur-Gur,
originally king of Ur only, later on became also ' king of
Shumer and Akkad ' ; his son Dungi lost, in the beginning of
his reign, some of the territory conquered by his father, but
regained it again, and even extended it far beyond that of his
father — conquered a ' kingdom of the four corners of the world.'
If this were true, we have, however, to explain why Dungi,
when building the temple E-SID-LAM, should have called
himself, at one and the same time, in one inscription ' lugal Uru-
iim-'''-ma lugal Ki-en-gi-'''-Urdu' (K. B. iii^- p. 80, 5), and in
another ' sar Uru-um-^' it lar ki-ib-ra-tim ar-ba-im ' (K. B. iii '.
p. 82, 6), seeing that both tablets record one and the same build-
ing. Winckler also gives to this question an answer. ' IcA Aabe,'
he says, O. L. Z. i. 239, 'das von jeher so erklart, dass er in
Nordbabylonien den Titel " Konig der vier Weligegenden,'' im Siiden
" Konig von Sumer und Akkad" bevorzugte! What Winckler must
have thought when he wrote the above statement is beyond my
imagination. Does not the Sumerian inscription of Dungi prove
clearly that he called himself, even in the north, ' king of Shumer
and Akkad'? How then could he have ' bevorzugt' the title
' king of Shumer and Akkad ' in the south ? We see then that
Winckler's explanation is absurd-^Dungi could not attribute to
himself at one and the sariie time two different titles ; and if not,
we have to refer those two inscriptions recording the building of
E-SID-LAM to two different Dungis, i. e. to Dungi I. and
Dungi III. For—
3. As long as we do not find inscriptions which prove that, e. g.,
Bur-Sin XL, or Ine-Sin, or Gimil-Sin bore also the title ' king of
Shumer and Akkad,' just so long we are not allowed to make the
title ' king of Shumer and Akkad ' equal to the . much more
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 243
comprehensive ' king of the four corners of the world ' ; for be it
remembered that among the thousands of dated tablets belonging
to Bur-Sin II., &c., not a single one can be found where he has
the title ' king of Shumer and Akkad.' (Bur-Sin I. only calls
himself king of Isin and king of Shumer and Akkad.)
II. The fact that a tablet published in R. T. xviii. pp. 73, ^74,
bears the seal-inscription of a certain Utu-a, the scribe of (Ga)lu-
kani, patesi of Shirpurla, does not prove anything either.
Only this much we can say about that tablet :
1. The date to be found on that tablet occurs both under the
reigns of Dungi III. (see date No. 31) and Bur-Sin II. (date No. 9),
hence that tablet may just as well have been written under the
latter king's reign.
2. Suppose, for the sake of argument, the date belongs to
Dungi III. If that were true we could make the equation Utu-a
contemporary of (Ga)lukani and Dungi III., but we are not
justified in making, without any more stringent arguments, (Ga)lu-
kani the contemporary of Dungi III. The former might have
died long ago. This is especially illustrated by E. A. H. 61,
which is a case-tablet dated mu 'S'^) gu-za '^dingir) En-lil-la(t) ha-gim
— a date found so far only among those of Bur-Sin II. (see No. 4).
It bears the seal-impression of a certain Ur-Galalim, which he
dedicated to ' Dungi, king of Ur, king of the four corners of the
world ' (see below). What equation could we make on the basis
of this tablet ? Of course only the following :
Ur-Galalim, contemporary of Dungi III. and Bur-Sin II. ; but
it would be absurd to make Dungi III. now also the contemporary
of Bur-Sin II. But just this absurdity is committed by Winckler.
As long as Winckler does not bring in more convincing arguments
that (Ga)lukani must have been the contemporary of Dungi III.,
we cannot follow him.
The occurrence of that seal-impression on the tablet dated
mu en Eridug-''' ba-a-tug may be explained, either —
(a) By supposing that also under the reign of Dungi II. tablets
were dated. This is not hard to imagine if we bear in mind that
R 2
244 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
this practice occurs as early as Sargon I. In this case (Ga)lukani
would be a contemporary of Dungi II. Or,
{&) By supposing that the seal of Utu-a was a family treasure,
and as such handed down from generation to generation until
it was used again at the time of Dungi III. or Bur-Sin II. At
any rate no definite argument can be built upon R. T. xviii.
PP- 13, 14-
III. Winckler's first argument in favour of the identity of
Dungi I. and Dungi III. was already answered by Thureau-Dangin,
O. L. Z. i. 173 : ' Ce fait nest pas conclua7it: il est en effet tris
admissible que deux rois du mime nom aient successivement travailU
a la construction d I'E-SIB-LAM:
But how is it with the other patesis of Shirpurla, viz. Gudea and
Ur-Ningirsu his son, who are said to be contemporaries of Dungi
(i. e. of Dungi I., Dungi IL, and Dungi III. — all these supposedly
one and the same Dungi) ? The occurrence of such names as
Gudea patesi (at Ur IV.), (Ga)lukani patesi (at Ur III. and Ur II.),
and Ur-Ningirsu en ki-ag i<i'»sr''') Nind (at Ur III.), might seem to
justify Winckler's theory, and in some measure corroborate it.
Let us first of all enumerate all those patesis, who either are
called directly ' pa-te-si Girsu-^'' (= Shirpurla, see time of Uru-
kagina), or who are thought to be such, occurring in connection
with the name Dungi. We arrange them according to the succes-
sion given in our Chronological Table, above, p. 30.
I. Gu-de-a pa-te-si (always without the name of the city 1) :
R. A. iv., iii. pi. xxvii. No. ^6 — a tablet with the date of
But-Sin II. No. 4.
R. A. iii. p. 135 — date bi tablet not given.
R. T. xviii. p. 65 ff. : ' Toutes ces tablet tes mentionnant le patesi
sont daties, explicitement ou implicitement, des rois de la II' (read IV '^
dynastie d'Ur, soil Gimil-Sin, Bur-Sin, et Ibil-Sin' (i.e. Ine-Sin).
In these tablets the name occurs sometimes written as ' Gu-de-a
pa-te-si' or ' (*«<f'>) Gu-de-a pa-te-si.' As such it is found in con-
nection with different gods — among whom also is iiUfSir) Dun-gi —
and also in connection with a certain Ur-^^'"^''') KAL pa-te-si.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 245
2. Ur-Ningirsu en h-ag^'^'"^'>''> Nind (hence not called patesi)
supposed to be Gudea's son :
(a) a contemporary of 'Dungi, king of Ur'; see C. T. 12218,
and above, p. 37.
(3) Dec. 37, 8; see above, p. 37, note i, where this Ur-Ningirsu
has the same title as that sub (a).
3. (a) (Ga)lukani; see above, p. 211.
(fi) Gala-Lama, son of a certain (Ga)lukan>; see above, p. 21.
To these ought to be added now —
4. Al-la-mu, the son of Ur-Sag-ga-mu,- patesi (the city is left
out); see above, p. 212, i.
5. Vr-^^^^sir) KAL (pronounce Kalbi-Lamassi), mentioned on
the following tablets of C. T., viz. :
94-10-15, 6, with date No. 16 of Dungi III.
15324, col. iv. „ „ 343 „
94-10-15, 4 „ „ 38 „
94-4-10,3 \ ^.,
19024, col. xii.^ " " ''■' "
12231, col. X. „ „ 48 a,,
21340, 1. 152 if. : nin-sid-ag-ga \ Ur-'^'^'*^S'r) Ba-u dumu URU-
DUR-DUR I itu &U-KUL-ta \ itu ZIB-KU-ku \ iiu 2 kam | ^al-U
I oran I Ur.{dingiy) KAL \ pa-te-si I mu Ki-mas-^' ffu-mur-li-'''
ba-^ul= No. 49 of Dungi III.
18346, col. viii. : No. 50 5 of Dungi III.
Comp. also 18933, 12913, and O. B. I. 124, where the dates
are broken away.
A, O. 2512 (see above, p. 28): Ur-'^'ii«eir) KAL pa-te-si in^gir)
Bur-^<i'"Si'-') Sin lugal = date i of Bur-Sin II.
C. T. 13138, rev., with date No. 3 3 of Bur-Sin II. (see
there).
This Ur-^'i'^sir) KAL is called pa-te-si Gir-su-''^ (= Shirpurla,
see time of Urukagina) in R. A. iv., iii. pi. xxix. No. 78, env., 10,
which tablet has the date No. 47 a of Dungi.
Hence we may rightly say that 6V-(*».f''') KAL, patesi of Girsu-
Shirpurla, was a contemporary of Dungi III. and reigned at least
246 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
forty years (from date No. 16 of Dungi III. to date No. 3 iJ of
Bur-Sin II)\
6. Two sons of a patesi are mentioned :
(a) C. T. 18343, col. vii. '7 (with date No. 47 a of Dungi III.) :
Gin Ur-'-^'"S'*') Nun-gal dumu pa-te-si.
(6) C. T. 18958, 1. 12 (with date No. 18 of Dungi III., may also
be date No. ii of Bur-Sin II) : 6V-('*V''') Ba-u dumu pa-ie-si.
Both these sons were probably those of ;7r-(*«.f«>) KAL.
If there is only one Dungi, then all the above-given patesis must
have been his contemporaries.
If fr-(*K^-2'-) KAL was patesi of Girsu during the last thirty-six
years of Dungi and the first four years of Bur-Sin II. we would
be obliged to put Gudea, together with his son, before Ur-^^'"si'')
KAL, i. e. they would have been patesis of Girsu-Shirpurla during
the first fifteen years of Dungi's reign. But where are we to place
(Ga)lukani? Of course also before Ur-^^'^S'r) KAL, and either
after Ur-Ningirsu or before Gudea. We would have in this case
the following succession : —
\{Ga)lukani'\ \
Gudea
,,,... )■ during the first fifteen years of
Ur-Ninnrsu " '
{Ga)lukani
Dungi III.
Ur-ifl'tvir) KAL : during the last thirty-six years of
and also during the first four
years of Bur-Sin II.
But Still one patesi is unaccounted for, i. e. AUamu, whom Scheil
(trh vratsemblablemenl, above, p. 212, i)and Thureau-Dangin (^««/-
etre, O. L. Z. i. 173, note 4) think to be a patesi of Shirpurla!
In this case he, too, had to precede Ur-^''-'"S'*-) KAL ; hence we
^ In E. A. H. 91 — a tablet dated from the reign of Gimil-Sin, date No. I —
Ur-<^dingir) KAL, patesi, is mentioned in the body of the tablet. Should he
have been patesi even during the whole reign of Bur-Sin II. , till the first year
of Gitnil-Sin ? In that case he must have reigned at least fifty years. From
this it would follow further that Gudea II. was not patesi of Girsu, but of
another city. See below, p. 248.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 247
would have to crowd _/b«/- palesis into the first fifteen years of the
reign of Dungi^ I Their respective patesiates must have been very
short ; one patesi followed quickly upon the other ! Could Gudea
have built all those temples and statues in such a short time — in
less than fifteen years ? But let us reason a moment.
We have seen that at the time of Bur-Sin II. (see above, p. 244,
sub i) there was a ' Gu-de-a pa-te-si' or '{fUn^ir) Gu-de-a pa-te-si!
From R. T. xviii. p. (>()^ No. 2, we know that this '^ingir) Gu-de-a
must also have been a contemporary of Gimil-Sin. Who is this
Gu-de-a pa-te-si or i.di»S'r) Gu-de-a pa-te-si .' Do these names stand
for one and the same person ? Suppose they do. In this case
Gu-de-a or ^<ii»eir) Gu-de-a would have been a patesi for at least
eleven years (from fifth of Bur-Sin II. to first of Gimil-Sin). Of
what city was our Gudea here a patesi } The tablets do not give
the name of the city. But we know already of one patesi of
Shirpurla called Gudea, hence we might be inclined to connect both
and make them one person. In this case Gudea would be a
contemporary of Dungi, Bur-Sin II., and Gimil-Sin. But this
is not possible, for in that case Gudea must have been a patesi
of Shirpurla together with Ur-Ningirsu his son, Ur-'^'^^"Sir) Kal,
and probably also with (Ga)lukani, AUamu, and Ur-Ninsun^fz)«
patesis over one and the same city ! Hence we have to differentiate
between Gudea, the father of Ur-Ningirsu, and Gudea, the con-
temporary of Bur- Sin 11. We still have to go a step further. We
also have to distinguish between Gu-de-a pa-te-si z.x\^ idingir) Qu-de-a
pa-te-si. The former has nothing to do with the latter. We know
from the inscriptions of Gudea of Shirpurla that he placed ' statues '
in different temples and ordered sacrifices to be offered unto them.
A great number of these statues are still preserved at the Louvre,
hence they also must have been in existence at the time of Ur IV. So
it then happened that the people of Ur IV. considered the statue of
Gudea of Shirpurla as a god, and called him outright kd'»g'r) Gu-de-a.
While Gudea was living he never called himself ' god ' ; this title,
' And if Ur-Ninsun belongs also after Ur-Ningirsu (see Chronological Table)
then even five patesis I
248 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
as we shall see, was preserved for kings only. We arrive then at
the following result :— Gudea, the father of Ur-Ningirsu, who had
put up statues of himself in different temples, was worshipped by
the people of Ur IV. as god = (*«.?'■'-) Gu-de-a ; but this Gudea
has to be distinguished from the other Gudea (Gudea II.), a con-
temporary of Bur-Sin II. and Gimil-Sin. If we bear this distinction
in mind all difficulties disappear. If we suppose that Allamu,
together with Gudea II., were patesis of Girsu-Shirpurla, which by
no means is certain^, we might arrange them as follows : —
Allamu, patesi (of Girsu?) during the first fifteen years of
Dungi III.
jj^Mngir XA L, patcsi of Girsu during (at least) the last thirty-
six years of Dungi III., and the first four years of Bur-Sin II.
Gudea II., patesi (of Girsu ?) during the remainder of the reign
of Bur-Sin II., and (at least) during the first year of Gimil-Sin.
It might be objected that on some tablets published by Scheil
in R. T. xviii. p. 65, Ur-i'''"iri^) KAL and Gu-de-a pa-te-si (not
(DiNGiR) Gu-de-a pa-te-si) are mentioned together, hence they must
have been contemporaries.
Upon this I would answer :
1. They may have been contemporaries: f/r-(*»i''''') KAL was
patesi of Girsu-Shirpurla, and Gudea of some other city. See also
R. T. xix. p. 63, where Scheil mentions Ur-i'^'"^''') NH-SU, patesi
of Gishuh, living at the time of Dungi III. (dates 37, 38).
2. If Gudea should really have been a patesi of Girsu-Shirpurla,
he took, probably during the end of Ur-^^^"-S''-) KAL's patesiat,
the latter's place, seeing that he iJJr-'^^'»-S'>') KAL) was at least for
forty years a patesi ^-
We have seen then that Winckler's arguments are weak, to say
the least; and as long as we are not convinced that
(fl) the title ' king of Shumer and Akkad ' is the same as ' king
of the four corners of the world ' ;
^ See above, p. 246, i.
^ Two more patesis are known to me, viz. Ur-gar, patesi, E. A. H. 91
(p. 327), and '.dtngir) GUG-KAM, O. B. I. 126 (p. 413). To what cities these
two patesis belong I am not prepared to say.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 249
{b) the title ' king of Ur ' is an abbreviation of either ' king of
Ur ' PLUS ' king of Shumer and Akkad ' or plus ' king of the four
corners of the world ' ;
we are justified in distinguishing three Dungis :
Dungi I., a contemporary of (Ga)lukanil.,the father of Gala-Lama;
Dungi II., a^ contemporary of (Ga)lukani II., and probably also
of Ur-Ningirsu, the en ki-ag (dingir) ]^ind;
Dungi Hi., a contemporary of AUamu and Z7r-(''»«^«''') KAL;
and hence have to differentiate the third dynasty of Ur from the
second as well as from the fourth '.
The kings of the fourth dynasty of Ur bear the proud title
' king of Ur, king of the four corners of the world,' and are the
following: Dungi III, Bur-Sin II., Gimil-Sin, Ine-Sin, and Idin-
Dagan (according to Hilprecht) '^.
' We should even claim five dynasties on the basis of R. A. iv. No. iii.
pi. ix. No. 31, where a {n)am-fatesi of Ur is mentioned ; hence there also must
have been at the time of Sargon I. patesis of Ur, who preceded Ur-Gur and
Dungi I.
' Inscriptions : GeneraJl —
Rec. Trav. xvii ; xvii. p. 64 ff . ; xix. p^ 47 If., p. 186.
R. A. iii. No. iv. p. ii8ff.
R. A. iv. No. iii. pi. xxvii. Nos. 76-81.
Z. A. xii. pp. 258-268.
W. R. Arnold, Ancient Babylonian Temple Records in the Columbia
University Library, New York, 1896.
Winckler, A. F. vi. p. 546, 6.
C. T. parts i, iii, v, vii.
C. T. 12031.
Inscriptions of Dungi III. :
Winckler, A. F. vi. p. 547, No. 7 ; C. T. No. 17288 (Semitic) ; comp. with
Z. D. M. G. xxix. p. 37, and K. B. iii'. p. 83, 6 (both in Semitic).
O. B. I. No. 124.
All tablets with the dates of Dungi given below.
Le Clercq, ii. pi. viii. No. 3.
Z. A. iii. p. 94.
Un poids de deux mines. Museum of Constantinople. Unpublished.
Lenormant, Textes in^dits, p. 163, No. 69 (doubtful).
Scheil, R. T. xviii. p. 73.
Scheil, R. T. xix. p. 50, 9. (The titles after Dungi are doubtful !) See also
sub Ur II. [Inscriptions of Bur-Sin II. : —
250 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
As regards Dungi III., it has been noticed above (p. 27) that' he
preceded Bur-Sin II. He must not be confounded with the older
Dungi, Dungi I. of the second dynasty, or with Dungi II. of the
third dynasty of Ur.
Thureau-Dangin's statement in R. S. 1897, p. 74, that Dungi III.
preceded Bur-Sin II., is confirmed by another tablet published in
Rec. Trav. xviii. p. 73, by Scheil. It reads: —
Gir Lugal-as {?)-tur-ri
Mu en-ma^-gal An-na en ^'"£''' Uru-k{\ ba-a-tug
The date given here apparently puts Lugal-as-tur-ri during the
reign of Bur-Sin II. (comp. E. A. H. 70; O. B. I. 127, 4). On
another tablet published by Scheil, ibid., we find that the same
Lugal-as- iur-ri is the servant of a certain Dungi, king of Ur, king
of the four corners of the world. That tablet reads : —
(Diiigir) Bun-gi
niia^ lig-ga
lugal Uru-um-^'-ma
lugal an-ub-da tab-tab-ba
Ltigal-(as ?)-tur-ri
dumu Ba-a-mu
nita^-zu
Inscriptions of Bur-Sin II. :
O. B. I. Nos. 20-22, 126, 127.
i. R. 5, No. xix ; Winckler, K. B. iii'. p. 89, I.
i. R. 3, No. xii. 1 and 2 ; Winckler, K. B. iii'. p. 89, 1.
i. R. 3, No. xii. 2 ; Winckler, K. B. iii'. p. 89, i.
All inscriptions with the dates of Bur-Sin II. given below.
Rec. Trav. xx. p. 67.
Inscriptions of Gimil-Sin ;
O. B. I. No. 12.
iv. R. 35, 4; Winckler, K. B. iii'. p. 88 c, Nd. i.
i. R. 3, No. xi. ; Winckler, K. B. iii '. p. 91, 2.
Sitzungsberichte d. Berl. Akad. d. Wiss. 17. Miirz, 1879; Winckler, K. B.
iii'. p. 91, 3 i also in Hommel, Geschichte, p. 341.
Peters, Nippur, vol. ii. p. 339 ; also in Hilprecht, Bible Helps, pi. 25.
Inscriptions of Ine-Sin :
O. B. I. No. 125.
All the tablets witli the dates of Ine-Sin given below.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 251
Scheil remarks on this text : '// es/ clair que ce Lugal-a\?)-tur-ri
vivant sous Id IP (ought to be IV) dynastic d'Ur ne pouvait etre le
conlemporain de Dungt.' Certainly he could not be the contem-
porary of Dungi I. of the second dynasty of Ur, but he might be
made the contemporary of Dungi III., a predecessor of Bur-Sin II,
Since this Lugal-as-tur-ri lived during the reigns of both Dungi III.
and Bur-Sin II., it follows that the latter ruler succeeded the former.
Having thus established the existence of a certain Dungi III., we
are justified in referring the Semitic Babylonian inscription —
generally ascribed to Dungi I. — to Dungi III. (see K. B. iii\ p. 82,
and Winckler, A. B. K. No. 37). In this inscription Dungi has
the title: —
da-LUM
sar Uru-um-^'
it ^ar
ki-ib-ra-tivi
ar-ba-im
which corresponds exactly to the Sumerian ; —
nita'g lig-ga
lugal Uru-um-'''
s& lugal
an-ub-da
tab-tab-ba.
Compare this Sumerian title with the seal found on E. A. H. 61
— a tablet dated at the time of Bur-Sin II. [mu (^") gu-za Wngir)
En-Ul-la{f) ba-gim)-^wheK this very same Dungi is mentioned : —
(din^rir) Dun-gi Dungi,
nita'g lig-ga the mighty hero,
252 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
lugal Uru-um-^'-ma king of Ur,
lugal an-\ub-da tab-tab-bd\ king of the four corners of the
world,
5 Ur \dingir- GM-alini] Ur-Galalim,
di ' the . . ,
nitag-zu is thy servant.
Another inscription belonging to Dungi III. is to be found in
Clercq, ii. pi. viii. No. 3, which records the 'restoring' (. . . na-g\)
of a certain temple to (<i'"e'''') Uru-ki, and also in Winckler, A. F.
vi. p. 547, No. 7 (identical with C. T. 17288) — a Semitic inscrip-
tion, and as such similar to that in Winckler, A. B. K. No. 37. The
former reads : —
A-na To
(iiu) A-GUR {= Ndru) A-GUR,
be-li-su [BE-NI-SU) his lord,
Dun-gi Dungi,
5 lar Uru-um-'^' king of Ur,
s\ar ki-tb-ra-ii]m [king of the four corners]
[ar-ba-i?n\ [of the world,]
[tdditi] [has presented it.]
Only comparatively very few historical documents belonging to
these rulers have come down to us. The dates, however, to be
found in the temple records written during their respective reigns
give us the means to form a clear conception of the 'mighty deeds'
of these several rulers. These dates, in addition to the enumeration
of buildings erected in honour of certain favoured gods, give
us also the names of the cities and countries against which the
armies of Ur were led to victory.
Dates of Dnngi III.
In C. T. 18358 (comp. Thureau-Dangin, O. L. Z. i. 163) a
tablet is published which is dated :
' Probably •= DI-KUD = daiatiu : judge.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 253
t/u GAN-MA&
mu-ui-sa e IP Ha (*»i'»»') Ri-Da-gan ha-ru
mu-us-sa-bi-ta
itu SE-IL-LA
mu Ur-bil-lum-^' ba-^ul-ku
itu 62 ^""^
itu-'dir 2-a-an sag ha-ni-ghl
The tablet, as stich, is a NIN-SID-A G (epu^ nikasi), covering
a period of sixty-two motiths, among which are two intercalary
months, hence five years. These five years are the following : —
(a) Col. i. 5 : mu-ul-sa mu-us-sa-a-bi, which, according to
col. vi. 5, is only an abbreviation ' of mu-uhsa e IP la {^'^eir) /jfj".
Da-gan ba-ru mu-ui-sa-bi.
(3) Col. i. 1 3 : mu Sa-al-ru-um-^' ba-^ul.
(c) Col. i. 18 : mu en (*».?''') Uru-ki mahe-ni-pad.
((f) Col. ii. I : mu Si-mu-iir-ru-um-^' Lu-lu-bu-um-''' a-du X-lal-
I-kam-ru ba-^ul.
(«) Col. ii. 7 : mu Ur-bil-lum-^' ba-^ul.
Nos. (ci)-(c) of these dates we find again on the reverse of
O. B. I. 125, last three lines. Hence in C. T. 18358 we have
the continuation of O. B. I. 125.
Again, in C. T. 18957, dated mu Ki-mas-^' ba-^ul, are men-
tioned, of the above-given dates : No. (c) in col. i. 5 ; No. [d) in
col. ii. 35, iii. 60, and iv. 108 (shorter form); No. («) in col. iv.
113. From this it follows that the date mu Ki-mal-^' ba-^ul
follows upon («). Further, according to Constantinople, 622 (see
Thureau-Dangin, R. S. 1897, p. 74), dates Nos. {d) and (e) are
followed by :
(/■) mu Ki-mal-^' ha-^ul.
(^g) mu-ul-sa Ki-mal-^'' ba-^ul.
(K) mu ffa-ar-h-J'' ba-^ul.
(f) mu ('''"g''-) BuM'''"^''''^ Sin lugal.
(>5) =0. B. I. 127, obverse, 2, &c.
* Such abbreviations are very common. Comp., among others, C. T. 14608
with 16370 ; C. T. 18422 with E. A. H. 1-3, &c.
254
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
From this it will be seen that dates (a)-\h) belong to the prede-
cessor of king Bur-Sin II., i.e. to Dungi III. ; see above, p. 27 ff.
O. B. I. 125, which contains the dates preceding that of No. (a),
has therefore to be referred to Dungi III., against Scheil, R. T.
xviii. 37 ff., and Hilprecht, O. B. I. p. 244, who referred it to the
reign of Ine-Sin. The beginning of the obverse and the end of the
reverse of that most interesting tablet are unfortunately broken off.
We were, however, able to adduce five dates — Nos. {d)-{h) — which
must have followed the last one given on the reverse of O. B. I.
125, i.e. date {c); hence we must supply also a lacuna of about
five dates, which preceded the first one given on the obverse of the
same tablet.
We would like then to restore O. B. I. 125 as follows : —
(i) mu {d'^S'*') Dun-gi lugal-e
(2) •
(3) mu i'l'"^''') Dun-gi-ra a sum-ma
(4) . • • ^
(g) [niu E-SID-LAM ba-ru'\
(6) Begins O. B. I. 125, obverse, 1. i.
O. B. I. 125, obverse, 1. 2 fi".
(7) mu gir En-lil-^' . . In the year when (the king) . . .
gir of Nippur.
I. Restored according to the analogy of the first date of Bur-Sin II. and Ine-
Sin. Instead of lugal-e, we might have also lugal only, or lugal-a-an ; comp.
O. B. I. 127, I.
3. This date I found when looking over a collection of case-tablets in the
possession of Mr. Noorian, former superintendent of the University of Pennsyl-
vania Expedition to Nippur.
5. Hypothetically enumerated according to K. B. iii'. p. 83, 6. The build-
ing of E-SID-LAM undoubtedly was important enough to warrant us in
placing it here, seeing that such a date has no other place in O. B. I. 125.
7. The first sign is that of T. C. 303 and Br. 9178, and not that for AN^U-
It is the same which is used in the composition GIR-SIG-GA (comp. R. A. iii.
p. 142, env.) = manzaz Jidni, Br. 9301. G/H alone occurs very often in the
E. A. H. tablets before proper names, and signifies there an officer connected
with the granaries ; see below, p. 424. In Z, A. xii. p. 268 a, GIR-
UNUG-M stands in parallelism to NAM-RA-AG UNUG->'i. The end of
this line, as well as that of No. 3 and No. 8, is broken away.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 255
(8) mu hcgal-e Uru-um-^'-\ma In the year when the king of
. . . .] Ur . . .
{oi) mu ■ma{fY^'"£^'>'^ Nin-lil-la{l) In the year when (the king)
ba-gab consecrated a ship to BSlit.
(10) mu {dingir) {Jru-M Te-zi-da In the year when (the king)
e-a ba-tur brought Nannar-Karzida into
(his) house.
(11) vm E-^ar-sag lugal ba-ru In the year when (the king) built
the royal Eharsag.
{12) viu.('''"ir''') Ka-di Dilru-rab- In the year when (the king)
ilu-''' e-a ba-tur brought Kadi into his house
in Durrabilu.
9. The sign for MA = elippu is not certain. For GAB, see Gipiil-Sin
date No. 2.
10. Te-zi-da, according to No. 39, where it is written Te-zi-da-ki, is a place.
(ditigir) [/ru-ki='Nsinna.T - Sin. Comp. with this also E. A. H. 89 (Bar-Sin
dates. No. 11) : {dingir) Uru-ki-Kax-zi-da, and note to it. This TE here and
in No. 39 is probably a mistake of the scribe. Comp. also Scheil, Rec.Trav. xvii.
38 ff., who reads here : Mu «« Nannar-te-a-zi-da ba-an-tur, but TE-A = KAR.
For TUR, comp. Gudea B, vii. 19, 20 : (alan) E-ninnii a-mu-na-ni-tur, ' the
statue he brought into the temple Eninnfi,' and D, v. 9, 10. The god Nannar
of Karzida is brought twice into his temple, No. 10 and No. 39.
1 1. £-^'a;--ia^= ' mountain house ' ; comp. (dingir) Nin-Jiar-sag and the city
ffar-sag-kalam-ma. Jensen, K. B. iii'. p. 22, note 5, reads Ur-sagiox dar-sag.
The lugal here is the gen. to E-gar-sag='Cat royal Eharsag.
12. The god Kadi we met already at the time of Entemena ; comp. Cone,
i. 8-12 : Me-silim lugal KfiM-ge ka (dingir) Ka-di-na-ta ku gan-bi-ra ki-ba
na ne-ru. Comp. also 'Babyl. Chron.' col. iii. 11. 44, 45; iii. R. 68, 5315, 54 i,
f7^, and K. 4629, rev., iii. 10 (Reissner, Sum. babyl. Hymnen, p. 135), but
especially Winckler, Altbabyl. Keilschrifttexte, No. 16, which reads:
(flu) Mu-ia-bil
Mutabil,
NITA& LIG-GA
the mighty hero,
mi-gir
the favoured one
W«) KOrdi
of Kadi,
na-ra-am
the beloved
(ilu) litar
of Ishtar,
'sakkanakku
the shakkanakku
DAr-ilu-ki
ofDflrilu,
ma-bi-is
the one who puts down
ta-ka-ad (written ga-ga-ad)
the heads
256 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
{13) mu C'''"^''-) NU-KU-SIR- In the year when (the king)
DA KA-SAL-LU f'' e-a brought NU-KU-SIR-DA
la-tur into his temple in Kasalla.
(14) viu E-GAL-BIlugal ba-ru In the year when (the king) built
the royal Ehalbi.
(15) OT« (*»i'''»') Uru-kt En-lil-^' In the year when (the king)
e-a ba-iur brought Nannar of Nippur
into (his) house.
E. A. H. 94.
(16) WW en NIR-ZI An-na en In the year when (the king) was
{dingiy) Uru-ki MA^-e declared by a decision to be
ni-pad high-priest and true protector
of Anu and of Nannar.
um-nta-ati of the troops
An-'sa-anM of Anshan,
Elam-tim Elam,
Si-mai-ki-ivi Sinaashku,
il ri-is and who helps
Ba-ra-ai-si-im-ii (comp. p. 1 28, 5) Barahse.
If this god Kadi is the god of Mesilim, and Slesilim is the king of Kish, it is
very probable that Dfirilu or Dflrrabilu, the place where the god was especially
worshipped, was situated in the kingdom of Kish. D4ru-rab-ilu-^i written in
Siuva. = bad-gal-dingir-^. A proper name, UrA<ii''i;ir) Ka-di, is very common
at this time.
13. The reading of the name of the god is merely hypothetical. The name
of the city ought to be read KA-SAL-LU. The copy gives for LU=^KU.
Comp. E. A. H. 134, 22 ; and see for the present, above, p. 158, and iv. R. 36,
No. I, obv., col. ii. 23.
14. TheE-GAL-BIis probably a 'house of his {BI) Gal' = a.n officer men-
tioned in the E. A. H. texts in connection with the herds ; see p. 414 {g).
i6._ For en, see Jensen, K. B. iii'. p. 67, note *t. The sign transcribed by
MAS is that of Br. 20Z4 (=urtsu). Scheil, in Rec. Trav. xix. p. 56,
No. 66, mentions a tablet which has the inscription AY-Br. 2024-*«, which
stands for ' /e noni de la ville KI-MAS-ki} Indeed, sometimes our date
runs: Mu en [NIR-ZI] [An-nd] Kdingir) Uru-ki MA^ ( = Br. i726)-e ni-
pad; see E. A. H. 94. It is therefore evident that Br. 2024 =MAS (Br.
1726). MAS=pardsu, Br. 1785. MAS-E = 3. noun, which in connection
with BAD {=iamii, Br. 9417) may mean ' to declare by a decision or oracle,'
and should be translated passively ; ' In the year when the king was de-
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 257
(17) mu alan^'i'«S'>-) ]S[in-lil-la{l) In the year when (the king) built
ba-\ru\ the statue of B§lit.
(18) mu en NIR-ZI An-na en In the year when (the king) was
{dingir) Uru-ki ba-tug'ga invested high-priest and true
protector of Anu and high-
priest of Nannar.
(19) mu NI-KI& {/)-MI-DA- In the year when (the king)
SU dumu-sal lugal nam- raised ... the princess (=the
nin Mar-ha-h^' ku ba-il daughter of the king) to the
lordship over Marhashi.
clared by a decision to be the EN! &c. This is justified not only by
E. A. H. 94, where we have MAS-E-R\J, but also by date No. 18, where we
read instead of MAS-E ni-pad = ba-tug-ga. Hence, in No. 15 the king
' was declared to be the En,' in No. 18 'he is invested EN.' E. A. H. 94 is
also against Thurean-Dangin's translation (O. L. Z. i. 167), who takes ma's-
pad in the sense of ' Hire, choisir' But mas-pad is more than pad only, it
implies that ' the choosing, eleciting, declaring ' was done on the strength of
some oracle or decision by the gods. See also Gudea B, iii. 14 ; and note
to D^c. 2'°'', No. 2, iii. 3-6. This is also the reason why we translate : ' The
king was declared by a decision,' &c., and not with Thureau-Dangin : ' The
king chose a high-priest.' Every king, be it remembered, is patesi-gal of his
gods, and was made such at the beginning of his reign. NIR, Br. 6283, 6282 :
etellu, edlu ; ZI= klnu. The NIR-ZI probably is parallel to the en-MA G-
GAL (Bur-Sin dates. No. 5), and may be translated ' lord and tine protector
of.' Comp. also Scheil, Rec. Trav. xvii. 38 if., who refers a date similar to this
to Gimil-Sin. Comp. also No. 46. In C. T. 13164 this date reads: mu en
{dingir) URU {sic, without KI; comp. p. 269, note 11) ib-pad.
17. Thureau-Dangin, O. L. Z. i. 167, reads na{d), Br. 8986, E. C. 368,
but incorrectly. Nad looks somewhat different ; comp. O. B. I. 1 24, obv., iii.
1. i I from the end ; iv. 4 ; v. 3 from the end. He translates : 'fit le lit.'
19. The sign for KIS is not certain ; it is that of T. C. 203 = GIR + a small
/)/ put under it. The NI-KiS {?)-MI-DA-SU h probably the proper name
of the daughter of the king. Scheil, Rec. Trav. xix. p. 55, note i, translates:
' ann^e oil ... la fille du roifut ilevie d, la sovveraineti de Mardaski? If this
translation be correct, we should have here an instance of women sitting on the
throne in these times over certain dominions and cities. Comp. however note
to No. 33. The expression NAM-NIN, the lordship (of a woman), in oppo-
sition to the NAM-EN, lordship (of a man), undoubtedly speaks for Scheil's
position (against Hilprecht, O. B. I. p. 245, note 5) : ' que des princesses aient
octupi de hautes dignitis civiles d, cetle ipoque! Marhashi ^Mafsiih, in
Northern Syria (Hommel, A. H. T. p. 37). See iv. R''. 36, No. i, col. i. 17.
S
258 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
(20) mu had-ki ki-bi ha-ab-gi
(21)
In the year when (the king) re-
stored the wall of the place.
In the year when (the king)
assembled the inhabitants of
Ur, strong and mighty soldiers.
In the year when [the king] . . .
Ninib, the great patesi of
Bei . . .
(2 3)[w«f*V''-i^«-/?7-/«(/)(*"i''''> In the year when ... of B^l
Nin-lil-la{l)-ge and Baiit . . .
(24) ha-dug-ga
mu dumu Uru-um-^'-ma
{ga)lu GIS-BU DUR-
DUG ba-ab-hr
(22) mu ('''"^''') Nin-ib pa-ie-si-
gal '^ingir) En-lil-la{t)-ge
O. B. I. 125, Reverse.
(25) mu ui
(26) mu lugal
One year after . . .
In the year when the king
20. The bad-ki is the wall of the place kot' i^oxiiv, i. e. the wall of Ur.
Thureau-Dangin, 1. i;., reads UbaraM (Br. 4398) = Unik?
21. Ser - E. C. 365 = kasdru, H. W. B. 590: zusammenbringen, ver-
sammeln ; compare also such expressions as kasdru talfdza, kasAru uimdnu.
{Ga)lu GiS-B U, as well &sD UR-D UG, is in opposition to dumu Uru-um-ki-ma.
GI^=^zikaru; BU^gitmalu. For DUR-DUG, comp. Br. 10574, kib^
"ia amUu, H. W. B. p. 346 ; here nndoubtedly in the sense of ' to bend down,'
trans. = ' to oppress,' 'to cast down.' The {ga)lu DUR-DUG then would
be "people that cast down' = soldiers. In K. 4395, col. iv. 31-33, we have
the following expressions : amil rhb DUR-DUG-SER and amll DUR-DUG-
SER, which are explained by '^"tll rAb ka-sir and a>«^' ka-sir. Delitzsch,
H. W. B. p. 691, says : ' . . . nocA unHcher ist, welche Bedeatung kasdru in den
beiden Bertifsnamen kdsir und rab kdsir hat! Our passage here explains
Delitzsch's difficulty. A {ga)lu DUR-DUG is a soldier, one whose business
it is ' to oppress, to cast down ' = Arabic Jj'lS..« ; and if this soldier is a
{DUR-DUG-)SER he is an enlisted soldier, one that was called to his post
by the king, and amil rcib DUR-DUG-SeR is the captain of the enlisted
soldiers.
23. A god {sic) is called here pa-le-si-gal I With this Ninib, the great patesi
of Bel, comp. {dingir) Mn-gir-su ( = Ninib) gud lig-ga (dingir) En-lil-la{l).
23. This date apparently is not complete.
24-36 are mutilated.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 259
(27) mu Kar-har-'"' ba-^ul In the year when (the king) de-
vastated Karhar.
{28) mu {Si\-mu-ru-um-^' ba-^ul In the year when (the king) de-
vastated Simuru.
(29) viu Si-mu-ru-um-^' a-du-II- In the year when (the king) de-
kam-ma'-ru ba-^ul vastated Simuru for the second
time.
(30) mu Ifa-ar-si-i'' ba-^ul In the year when (the king) de-
vastated Harshi.
(31) »2« en Ertdug-^'-ga ba- . In the year when (the king) was
tug-ga invested lord of Eridu.
(32) mu-us-sa en Eridug-^'-ga One year after (the king) was
ba-tug-ga invested lord of Eridu.
E. A. H. 95.
(33) fnu dumu-sal lugal pa-le-si In the year when the daughter
An-ia-an-^'-ge ba-iug of the king became {sic) patesi
of Anshan.
27. According to Thureau-Dangin , O. L. Z. i. 168, a king of Karhar is
mentioned in le Clercq, No. 121, whose name is AN-KI-SA-A-Jil.
29. a-du-II-kam-ma-ru. For A-DU, see Delitzsch, H. W. B. p. 23. The
R U clearly indicates that we have not to translate ' twice,' but ' for (ru) the
second time.' This also follows from Nos. 28 and 36, where it is said that
the king devastated Simuru (sc. for the first time), and for the third time
respectively. Hence the expression a-du-\o-lal-\-kani, either with or with-
out RU, cannot mean ' neuf fois simultanimenV (Scheil, Rec. Trav. xix.
p. 55, note 1), but 'for the ninth time.' See further below. That the
events, which happened more than once, are quoted in their consecutive order
is a proof that this tablet is arranged chronologically (O. B. I. p. 244, note 6).
30. Thus the name of this city has to be read. The signs for Ha + ar
are not clear.
33. Anshan in Elam, Delitzsch, Parad. p. 321. The whole may be translated :
' annie ok la fitle du roi devint patesi dans le pays a^ Anshan ' (Scheil, Rec.
Trav. xvii. p. 38, note 6, and ibid. xix. p. 55, note i). Hilprecht, O. B. I.
p. 245, note 5, rejects this translation ' on the ground that there is no
evidence that in ancient Babylonia women were permitted to occupy the
highest political or religious positions independently,' and translates : ' In the
year when the patesi of Anshan married a daughter of the king ' {tu^ =
S 2
26o EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
E. A. H. 96.
(34 a) mu Kar-har^i a-du-II- In the year when (the king) de-
kam-ru ba-^ul vastated Karhar for the second
time.
(34 b) mu Kar-har-ki a-du-III- In the year when (the king)
kam-ru ba-^ul devastated Karhar for the third
time.
E. A. H. 97.
(35) mu Si-mu-ru-um-^' a-du- In the year when (the king) devas-
Ill-kam-ru ba-^ul tated Simuru for the third time.
(36) mu-uhsaSi-mu-ru-uma-du- One year after (the king) de-
Ill-kam-ru ba-^ul vastated Simuru for the third
time.
(37) mu An-ia-an-^' ba-^ul In the year when (the king) de-
vastated Anshan.
E. A. H. 98.
(38) mu-uhsa An-ia-an-^' ba-^ul One year after the king devas-
tated Anshan.
(39) mu (^'"S'*-) Uru-ki Te-zi- In the year when (the king) for
da-^' a-du-II-kam-ru e-a the second time brought Nan-
ba-tur nar-Karzida into (his) house.
(40) mu Bad-Ma-da-^' ba-ru In the year when (the king)
built Dfir-Mada.
aJi&su, ' to take a wife, to marry,' H. W. B. p. 42). Both translations are
grammatically possible. Date No. 19, however, seems to be evidence enough
that women actually did occupy such high political positions. See note to
No. 19. The fact that Anshan very soon after this (comp. No. 37) was
devastated by Dungi III. also speaks for Scheil's translation. Dungi III. having
put his daughter on the throne of Anshan, the people of that city rebelled ;
Dungi III. had to subdue them.
34 i. This date, so far found only in C. T. part vii. No. 1 5324, col. iv., is left
out in O. B. I. 125. Whether it belongs here is doubtful. So much only is
certain, that it is one of the dates of Dungi III., because immediately preceding
the date Ur-ldin^ir) Kal patesi is mentioned. See, however, note to date 48.
40. Bad-Ma-da cannot be translated here = ' the wall of the land,' on
account of the KI, which shows that Bad-Ma-da ( = Semitic Diir-Mati)
is a place. Comp. E. A. H. 99, 100; C. T. 18389.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 261
E. A. H. 99, 100.
(41) mu-us-sa Bad-Ma-da-^' ba- One year after (the king) built
ru Dfir-Mada.
E, A. H. loi.
(42) mu e IP ^a Hi W«eir) Ba- In the year when the damkar of
gan-na ba-ru Ishi-Dagan built a temple
(sc. for Dungi).
42. The following variations of this date may also be found :
C. T. 13927, col. i. 22 : mu [ui-scC) e IPia lU Da-an {s\c)-gan ba-ru {mu-
ui-sa-bi).
C. T. 18358, vi. 5 : mu{jii-sa) e JP'ia {dingir) lU-Da-gan ba-ru.
C. T. 14594 — * tablet from the time of Bur-Sin II — mu IP IHDa-gan
ba-ni (sic).
E. A. H. loi : mu IP "sa H (dingir) Dagan e idingir) Dtm-gi-ra ba-ru.
If we compare the above-given dates with C. T. 94-10-16, 25, obv. iii., and
C. T. 95-10-12, 8, obv. ii., where a scribe {dup-sar) UrUlingit) l^Hdingir)
Ba-u is mentioned, and with C. T. 19740, iii. 70, 18371, and 18422, where
we find a Pa (= officer) Ur-'^dingM lU-'dingir'i Ba-u, then there cannot be
any doubt that Hi-<dingir> Dagan, or (.dingir) /H Dagan, or Ki-Dagan, or
IH-Da-an-gan, or possibly also Wngiri j'siAdingir) Dagan belong together, and
are an analogy-formation to [£;>-]- Wm^J» rsi-<-dingir) Ba-u. Ur-^dixgir) psi-
(.dingir) Ba » is a proper name, and if translated would mean ' the servant (lit.
dog, ,53/i5«) of Ishi-Ba'u.' 7??-.5a'«, then, is another proper name. Such proper
names formed out of another proper name with Ur or Lugal or Eri or {fid>)lu
preceding it are very often found at this time ; comp. Ardi-Naram-^iM Sin (R. T.
xix. p. 47), Lugal-'-dingir) Dungi ni-ku (C. T. 94-10-16, 3, obv. iii.), (^Gd)lu
iir-pir-la-kt (C. T. 48427), {Ga)lu-Xi-nu-nir-ki (C. T. 17757), Ur-E-
ninnA, and Ur-E-INNANNA-GE. From this it follows that we have to
take lii'Dagan with or without dingir before Pii or Dagan as a proper
name. The sign for Psi is IS, Br. 5079. I transcribe hi instead of IS,
because we have here undoubtedly a 'phonetic writing' for I-H-Dagan;
hence also a Semitism. Comp. with this the phonetic writing of the name of
king Bur-Sin I. The name lii-Dagan would mean : ' O Dagan, lift up.' Comp.
also Hilprecht, vol. ix., 30, 5, where the following name is found: Bil-zir-
iddina apil-su ia I-U-^dingir) KUR-GAL. That the sign dingir should some-
times be found before Pii is not strange ; comp. (dingir) R-me-^dingir) Dagan.
Further below we shall see that the sign dingir is found either (a) before the
names of kings, or (S) before the names of certain old patesis who erected
262 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
(43) mu-m-sa e IP sa TJz-C*"^''') One year after the damkar of
Da-gan-na ba-ru Ishi-Dagan built a temple
{sc. for Dungi).
(44) mu-us-sa e IP sa Ih-i^'^sif) Two years after the damkar of
Da-gan-na ba-ru\mu-ui-~\ Ishi-Dagan built a temple
sa-\a.-bi\ {^sc. for Dungi).
(45) mu ^a-al-ru-^i ba-^ul In the year when (the king) de-
vastated Shashru.
statues of themselves and put them up in certain temples. If that be true,
then (dingir) rsi-(dingir) Bdu and idingir) /}i.{ciingir) Dagan are or were either
kings or celebrated old patesis, whose statues were still in existence at the time
of Ur IV, and in whose honour certain persons were named. The Identification
of the third sign is not yet certain. Scheil (R. T. xvii. p. 38) and Thureau-
Dangin formerly identified it with Br. 802 ; see Ew C. 199 and 200, both of
which forms occur in our passage. Sayce, who translates our passage by :
'In the year when the temple at the edge ( = "saptu, Br. 803) of the mound
of Dagan was built,' follows them (P. S. B. A. xxi. p. 21). Thureau-Dangin
(O. L. Z. i. 168) transcribes our sign now by Br. 820. King, in his copy of
C. T., gives sometimes a form which resembles Br. 855. Comp. also the
different forms as given in 11. 43 and 44, and in E. A. H. loi.
Scheil, in Rec. Trav. xix. p. 55, 3, mentions a name which is written either
IP ^A (dingir) En-lil, or our sign in question, ■¥ ^A ■'r (dingir) En-lil. From
this he concludes correctly : ' cette variante nous donne la vcUeur IP'pour ce
dernier signe qui est oil le No. %\o ou le No. 812 {Ibira) = damkdru de Brunnow'
The latter identification is undoubtedly the correct one. For damkdru
(H. W. B. p. 222), comp. Jensen, Z. A. vi. 349, and Hilprecht, O. B. I. 262,
and note 6. The very fact that SA after IP may be omitted, as is actually
done in C. T. 14594, shows that it is neither a part of //"nor oi Ishi-Dagan —
it is nothing more than the sa which is sometimes employed in Assyrian to
express the genitive ; hence we have here another Semitism. Compare also
IP la 5,^/ above. E. A. H. loi, as well as C. T. 14594, show that the sub-
ject of the whole sentence is IP — ' they (he) built.' Our date can be trans-
lated only as has been done above. Thureau-Dangin (O. L. Z. 168) translates :
annie oil il construisit le temple Br. 820-SA-IS de Dagan? The fact that
dingir is found sometimes before IS makes that translation impossible. For
such a 'temple of Dungi,' comp. among other places C. T. 12912, obv., iii.
24, and especially C. T. 94-10-15, 4, where the amount of grain is mentioned
that was offered unto Dungi in such a temple. E. A. H, 5 mentions 60 -h
X gur 7 ka gar-zid lugal §AG-GAL IP'sa Psi- Dagan (food for the damkar of
Ishi-Dagan). See, however, also Index. j«3nom.propr. beginning with //"- fa . . .
44. The sa in this line has to be completed to read either mu-us-sa-ii or
mu-tii-sa-d-bi, or even mu-sa-a-bi, C. T. 18358, i. 5.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 263
(46) mu en (dingir) Uru-ki mas-e- In the year when the king was
ni-pad declared by a decision to be
high-priest of Nannar.
E. A. H. 1-3.
(47 <2) Mu St-mu-ru-um-''' Lw In the year when (the king)
lu-bu-um-¥ a-du-10-lal-i- devastated Simurru and
/"""^ru ba-^ul Lulubi for the ninth time.
46. That dates 46 ff; belong here has been shown above. It is however
remarkable that Dungi III. should once more be declared ' high-priest of Nannar,'
seeing that he not only had been ' declared ' already, but even ' invested
high-priest of Nannar.' Comp. above, dates Nos. 16 and 18, Should we have
to divide the dates given on O. B. I. 125 between two rulers! This seems to
me more than probable, or else there hardly would have been any necessity
of stating one and the same thing twice. If this date read mu en (dingir)
Uru-ki a-du-II-kam-ru mai-eni-pad it would be intelligible, but not so
otherwise, I would therefore assign hypothetically the last few dates to the
predecessor of Bur-Sin II., i.e. to Dungi III., while the earlier dates may belong
to some unknown ruler. If Winckler's theory — see above — could be proved
to be correct, we might refer the earlier dates to Ur-Gur I. ; but this is still an
open question. We have a similar case in O. B.I. 127, where the earlier
dates belong to Bur-Sin II., while the later ones belong to Gimil-Sin.
47 a. Simnini ( = S_»»>). The situation of this country is not yet certain.
Scheil (R. T. xvii. p. 38 and xix. p. 55, note i) places it in the neighbourhood
of Lulubi ; comp. above, ' king An-nu-ba-ni-nt of Lulubi.' Hommel (Aus der
babylonischen Altertumskunde, p. 9), whom Hilprecht (O. B. I. p. 245, note 4)
follows, identifies it with Simyra in Phoenicia, between Arvad and Tripolis.
(See also Hommel, A. H. T. p. 38.)
In E. A. H. 3 we have Si-mu-ru-um-RU, which latter /^ 6'^ undoubtedly is
a mistake for ' ki! On other tablets I found these names written also Si-mu-
ur-ru-(um) and Lu-lu-bu, either with or without KI. In C. T. 18422 we find
mu Si-mu-itr-um-hi Lu-bu (sic), &c.
a-du-\a-lal-l-l'am,rtf„ For lo-lal-i = 9, see below, p. 340, under L,AL-NI,
That A-DU = 'time' is proved by O. B. I, 125, rev. 4, 5. This expression
' for the ninth time ' presupposes tjie first, second, &c., devastation of the same
cities. But no such first, second, &?., devastation of these cities is mentioned
in O. B. I. 125. Only three devastations of Simurru alone were enumerated
above, 11. 28, 29, 35, g6, ^d no mention is made at all of the fourth to eighth
devastation either of Simurru alone or of Simumi and Lulubu together. We
have to suppose, therefore, that the author ofO, B. I. ijg either left Lulubu
264 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
(47 i) \Mu-u\hsa viu [Si-mu- One year after (the king) devas-
ru-u\m.-''' Lu-lu-[bu- tated Simurru and Lulubi for
uni-^' a-d]u~io-lal-i- the ninth time.
kam-\ru ba-'\^ul
E. A. H. 4, 5-
(48) Mu Ur-bil-lum->'' ba-'gul In the year when (the king)
devastated Urbillum.
unmentioned in 11. 28, 29, 35, 36, or that ' for the ninth time ' has to be referred
to Simurru alone. But, as already stated, we have no fourth to eighth devas-
tation of Simurru either. The reason for this probably is that these latter
devastations occurred late in the year when the other events enumerated above
in 11. 37-46 had taken place already, or else we would have here an apparent
discrepancy, especially when we take into consideration date No. 47 a. This
date mKst be identical vrith the date No. 48, or else the reckoning of C. T.
18358 (above, p. 353) would be wrong, i. e. from date No. 44 to No. 48 would not
be a space of five years plus itu dir 2-a-an, but one of six years. The same
may be said of date No. 50 b, which is the same — only the earlier one — as
date No. 51 . This probably is also the case with date No, 34 i = 35. The truth
of this conld be easily established if we compare the names of the months given
on tablets dated according to No. 47 b with those dated according to No. 48.
The months to be found on tablets dated according to No. 47 b had to be the
earlier ones.
47 b. I found this so far only on C. T. 19024, xii., and 96-4-10, 3, where it is
preceded by Ur-(di"eir) KAL pa-te-si. The wording of this date is noteworthy,
showing that the expression tmi-us-sa Simurru, &c., is an abbreviation of
the fuller form mu-ui-sa mu Simurru, &c., i. e. the year [mu') that follows
{us-sd) the year {mu) when, cScc.
48. E. A. H. 4 has only Ur-bil-lum, without hi. C. T. 12231, x., gives this
date more fully : Ur-[,dingir) KAL pa-te-si, mu (dingir) Dun-gi, nitag lig-ga,
lugal Ur-um-ki-ma lugal an-ub-da tab-tab-ba-ge, Ur-bil-lum-^', Si-mu-ru-
um-ki, Lu-lu-buJ'', "id Kar-J^ar-ki-ra, KUL(T) KU-SAG -^'rasa^eA IS (comp.
E, C. 394)-^8 'iu-bur-ra im-mi-ra, i. e. in the year when Dungi III., &c., of
Urbillum, Simurru, Lulubu, and Karhar . . . their soldiers (read KU-KA
'=dur-dug, comp. above, 1. 21) drove together (lit. gathered together with the
hand, BUR=palsdru, Br. 343; H. W. B. 520) and cast them dovra {RA =
raidsu, H. "W. B. 617). It is possible that because Karhar is mentioned in this
longer date No. 34 b belongs here, it being the third devastation of that
city I (Comp. Nos. 27 and 34,)
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 2j6e,
E. A. H. 6-8.
(49) Mu Ki-mal-ki {ffu-mur- In the year when (the king)
ti-l") ba-^ul devastated Kimash (and Hu-
murti).
E. A. H. 9-17.
(50 a) Mu-ui-sa Ki-ma^-ki [ffu- One year after (the king) devas-
mur-ti-'"') ha-^ul tated Kimash (and Humurti).
E. A. H. 18-24.
(50^) Mu-us-sa Ki-mai-^' {ffu- Two years after (the king)
mur-ti-J"') ba-'gul mu- devastated Kimash (and Hu-
ul-sa-a-bi murti).
E. A. H. 25 and 104.
(51) Mu ffa-ar-h-^i ffu- In the year when (the king)
mur-ii-^^) ba-gul devastated Harshi and Hu-
murti.
49. Ki-ma's, later on pronounced MAS, 19 situated in Central Arabia,
Delitzsch, Parad. p. 242 ; Hommel, A. H. T. p. 38. In E. A. H. 8 ba-gul is
omitted.
50 a. For the meaning of tH-sa = ' joined to,' ' following,' see Hilprecht,
O. B. I. 244, note 6, and Br. 5060, emidu. The lit. translation then would
be : In the year that follows (the year) when, &c., i.e. ' one year after ' ; see
above, date No. 47 b.
50 b. Mu-ui-sa-a-bi — its following year to the year that follows {mu-u''s-sd)
the year when, &c., i. e. ' two years after,' The following forms of this
date occur : mu-ui-sa 'Ki-mai->'' ba-^ul mu-ui-sa-a-bi, E. A. H, 18 ; or the
same with ba-gul left out, E. A. H. 19-22; or only mu-ui-sa mu-ui-sa-a-bi,
E. A. H. 23, 24. These two latter dates may also belong to No. 44. C. T.
18346, viii., gives this date more fully : UrAdingir) KAL, fa-te-si, mu (dingir)
Dun-gi, niiag lig-ga, lugal Uru-um-^i-ma, lugal an-ub-da tab-tab-ba-ge, Ki-
mai-lii jffu-mur-ti-ki, ih ma-da-bi ud-I mu-g;ul, mu-ui-sa-a-bi, i. c. in the year
when Dungi III., &c., devastated on one day (or at one time) Kimash, ^umurti,
and their lands. That this date is the same as No. 51 has been shown above ;
see note to date No. 47.
51. It will be noticed that in dates Nos. 49 to 51 jgumurti is sometimes
mentioned in connection with Kimash and sometimes with ^arshi. Compare
also Uncertain Dates, No. 6, where we find i^arshi, Kimash, and ^umnrti men-
tioned together. Comp, further the shorter form, mu Ha-ar-ii-H (C. T. 21338,
vii.i62), with thelonger, mu Ha-ar-ii-ki Hu-mur-ii-k'ba-^ul (ibid., col, viii. 185).
266 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
The immediate ' successor of Dungi III. was Bur-Sin 11 ^. (Comp.
above, Dates of Dungi III., sub {h) and {i).)
Dates of Bur-Sin II.
Among the dates belonging to this ruler are to be found the
following (comp. also O. B. I. 127, obv., and Thureau-Dangin,
R. S. 1897, p. 73, and O. L. Z. i. 170) :—
E. A. H. 27-32.
(i) Mu ('''V''') ^«r-(*».f''') In the year when Bur- Sin became
Sin lugal king.
E. A. H. 33, 34.
(2) Mu-us-sa idingir) ^j^f. Qne year after Bur-Sin became
{din^ir) Sm lugal king.
E. A. H. 35-54.
(3 a) Mu (*«^'''') ^a/--(*V«>-) In the year when king Bur-Sin
Sm lugal-e Ur-bil-lum- devastated Urbillum.
*«' mu-^ul
1. In E. A. H. 27 the sign BUR has not the determinative of god {dingir).
All the other tablets exhibit the sign of DINGIR before that of BUR. The
absence of the sign dingir is either due to the carelessness of the scribe, or it
may have been made illegible by the seal-impression, which has been rolled all
over the tablet, so that even the dividing lines are no more visible. See
p. 424-
2. This date does not occur in O. B. I. 127, and is not given by Thureau-
Dangin in R. S. 1897, p. 73, and in O. L. Z. i. 1 70. The same is true of dates
Nos. 3 b and 10.
3 a. The devastation of Urbillum has already been recorded under Dungi III.
The sign iugal generally has an £ after it, except in E. A. H. 47, 48, 51, 54.
' Scheil, Rec. Trav. xvii. p. 38, note 3, places Bur-Sin II. after Ine-Sin.
Hilprecht — who follows Scheil — arranges these rulers : Ine-Sin — Bur-Sin —
Gimil-Sin (O. B. I. p. 244, note 6).
' The sign for Bur is here = A MAR, Br. 9065. Bur = st. constr. of
Assyr. bAru. Bur-Sin has not to be read = Amar-Sin, because these rulers
are Semites. Comp. also what has been said about the name of Bnr-Sin I.
The name signifies, not ' child of Sin,' Delitzsch, B. A. p. 623, but ' a young ox
is Sin.'
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 267
(3 b) Mu-us-sa Ur-bil-lum-''' One year after (the king)
ba-gul destroyed Urbillum.
E. A. H. 55-67.
(4) Mu^g") gu-za^di«sir) En- In the year when (Bur-Sin)
lil-la{l) ba-gim erected the throne of B61.
E. A. H. 68-73.
(5) Mu en-mag-gal An-na In the year when (the king) was
ba-tug invested priest most high of
Anu.
3 b. This date so far is to be found only in C. T. (part vii.) 13138, rev.
It cannot belong to the reign of Dungi III. (see date 48), because there the
succession is established not only by C. T. 18957, but also by Con-
stantinople, 622 (see above). Besides this, vi^e know that in O. B. I. 125 the
mu-uhsa dates are mentioned — as a rule — while in O. B. I. 137 they never
occur ! Until this year Ur-idtngir) KAL was patesi of Girsu.
4. The sign for CIS is sometimes omitted before GU-ZA. So in E. A. H.
55, 64, 65, 67.
In some texts, however, we read : Mu {gi^-gu-za-mag('K"gir) En-lil-laiT)
ba-gim, i. e. In the year when (the king) erected the sublime throne of Bel ;
comp. E. A. H. 62, 63, 65.
For GIM or DIM = ban&, ' to build,' see Br. 91 12.
5. For the pronunciation of KU=tug, see Hommel, S. L. 402 ; and comp.
E. A. H. 87 (sub (9)), where it is followed by ga. For ba-tug^-gd) we also
have ba-a-tug, comp. E. A. H. 76 ; or in-tug(0. B. I. 126, col. vii.).
The subject of TUG musi be in all cases the king, as is evident from O. B. I.
1 26, col. vii. : mu iilingir) Bur-idingir) Sin nitag lig-ga lugal Uru-um-ki-ma
lugal an-ub-da tab-iab-ba-ge en U-unu-gal {dingir) Innanna in-tug.
TUG. Either Br. 10523, asdbu, here = Saphel uleHb, ' make to sit,'
H. W. B. p. 245 ; or better, Br. 10533 : labdiu, H. W. B. p. 371. Hence we
have here a. certain ' investiture,' and must translate : ' in the year when the
king was invested.' For «« = priest, high-priest, see Dungi III. dates. No. 16;
Scheil, Rec. Trav. xvii. p. 37 ; and Thureau-Dangin, R. A. iv. p. 142. In
some tablets we find this date given only by Mu en-mag-gal An-na ba-tug;
comp. E. A. H. 68, 69. E. A. H. 70-73, on the other hand, state that
Bur-Sin was invested ' priest most high ' of Ishtar and priest of Nannar (dingir
Uru-ki) = Sin, the moon-god, who is called in i. R. J, xix., ' king of Ur.'
The formula then runs : Mu en-mag-gal An-na en (dingir) JJra-ki ba-tug.
Curious is also the variant of C. T. 14606 : mu en-nun-gal An-na ki-ag (dingir)
Bur-(dingir) Sin en Eridug-ki ba-tug, which ought to be translated (against
z68 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
E. A. H. 74-77.
(6) Mu en-te-unu-gal ¥'"£(>■) In the year when (the king) was
Innanna ba-tug invested high-priest of the great
abode of Ishtar.
E. A. H. 78-86.
(7) Mu (*»^'''') Bur-(^'"^''''> In the year when king Bur-Sin
Sin lugal-e ^a-as-ru- devastated Shashru.
um-''' ha-^ul
O. B. I. 127, obv. 7.
(8) Mu ffu-u^i-nu-ri-^' ha- In the year when (the king)
^ul devastated Huhnuri.
Thureau-Dangin, O. L. Z. i. 1 70, note 9), ' in the year when he (i.e. the Icing)
was invested priest most high of Ann, beloved of Bur-Sin,'lord of Eridu.' It is
remarkable that Bur-Sin should be called here already ' lord of Eridu ' — a
position to which he was raised only later on ; comp. date No. 9. Should this
justify us in referring this latter date to the ' uncertain dates,' and in ascribing
it to his successors, i. e. either Ur-Ba'u II. or Gimil-Sin ? See note 8 ^ to
Uncertain Dates.
6. The sign for UNU{G) is here that for AB with the ^K«-signs =
Br. 4790. It is the same sign which occurs in the name for Ur = Uru-
unu{g)M-ma, which latter name we always transcribe as Uru-nra-ki-ma on
account of the MA. For TE-UNU, see Syl."= 93 = unu = makdnu (Br.
7722), H. W. B. p. 323. O. B. I. 137, obv., 5, has for en-te-unu-gal only
en-gar-gal. Thureau-Dangin translates this latter passage in R. A. iv., note i,
' annie oh U grand-frHre du grand TE-UNOU de INNANNA a iti instalU,'
but corrects himself in R. S. 1897, p. 73, and O. L. Z. i. 170, where he renders
it : ' annie ou {Bur-Sin) a iU invesli seigneur de lagrande Demeure iF Ishtar^
which latter translation is undoubtedly to be preferred.
7. The forms Sa-di-ru-ki and Sa-cCs-ru-um-ki occur side by side. Some
tablets give the name of king Bur-Sin (comp. E. A. H. 78, 79), others
do not (see E. A. H. 80-84). Once the KI after Sairum is left out
(E. A. H. 84).
8. This date does not occur in the E. A. H. tablets. The copy of Hil-
precht has Ri-ban-nu-ltu-ti — apparently a mistake of the scribe, see note 3 to
Uncertain Dates.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 269
E. A. H. 87.
(9) Mu en Eridug-''' ba- In the year when (the king) was
tug-ga invested lord of Eridu.
E. A. H. 88.
(10) Mu-ul-sa en Eridug-^' One year after (the king) was
ba-tug invested lord of Eridu.
E. A. H. 89.
(11) Mu en (<*'«<f»>-) Uru-ki- In the year when (the king) was
kar-zt-da ba-tug invested high-priest of Nan-
nar-KAR-ZI-DA.
9. NUN-Jii, when followed by ga, as is sometimes the case, has to be read
EridugM.ga, UrudugM-ga. E. A. H. 87 has ba-a-tug; E. A. H. 88 only
ba-tug.
10. This date so far is only fotmd in the E. A, H. collection.
11. The Kar-zi-da, on the one hand, is a temple (£) built or rebuilt by
Dungi I. lox '4i«gir) Nin-Uru-um-ki-ma, i.e. the Belit of Ur; it was there-
fore probably situated in Ur (comp. O. B. I. 16) : on the other a place, see
Dimgi III. dates. No. 10.
Scheil, in Rec. de Trav. xx. p. 67, published a text in Assyrian characters,
which mentions the introduction of Nannar-Y^nX&a, into his temple. As
such it is probably identical with date 10 of Dungi III., where, however,
Hilprecht's copy (O. B. I. 125) has TE-ZI-DA, which ought to be read
therefore KAR-ZI-DA. See the note to that date. The text above referred
to reads :
(dingir) URU For Nannar-
KAR-ZI-DA Karzida = ' Lebensburg;
lugal ki-ag-ga-ni-ir his beloved king,
(dixgir) Bur-^dingir) Sin Bur-Sin,
En-lil^-a of Nippur,
(dingir) En-lil-li by Bel
mu-fad-da called
SAG-US to be the SAG-US
e {dingir) En-lil-li of the temple of Bel ;
an-zi for the god of life,
an-^d kalam-ma-na the divine light of his world,
lugal lig-ga the powerful king,
lugal Uru-um-ii-ma king of Ur,
lugal an-ub-da tab-tab-ba-ge king of the four comers of the world.
270
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
To these dates may be added :
(12) Mu-ui-sa Bur-Sin-lugal-
e bad gal / Ur ku ki It
bi da tig ? ga mu-ru (so
Scheil, Rec. Trav. xix.
p. 59, No. 338)
Annie qui a suivi celle ou le roi
Bur-Sin a construit la grande
enceinte de Bit Kalbu-(ki) ? . . .
It may be stated right here, that the above-given dates, as well as
those that follow, by no means cover the whole reign of their
respective kings. This, e. g., is evident from two tablets (i. R. 5, xix. ;
i. R. 3, xii. I, 2) which record that Bur-Sin II. 'renewed' (BIL)
his city (i. e. Ur), and built for ('''"^>') £n-ki (= Ea) an apsu.
Probably we may find in the near future some tablets which are
dated from these two years. (Comp. also date 1 1 with Rec. Trav.
XX. 67.)
To the above-mentioned buildings has to be added the .ff/-
SAG-GUL-LA, which occurs in O. B. I. 20. The inscription
reads :
{dingir) En-lil For Bgl,
lugal kur-kur-ra the king of the lands,
KAR-ZI-DA
ud-ul-ru-a-ku{= ana&ml sdti, Br. 9154)
MI-KISAL GUD . '. . ru-a
en-nu-un (Br. 2838, nasdru) ti-la-a . . .
{dingir) Bur-<,dingir) Sin
ki-ag (dingir) URU-ge
MI-KISAL azag-ga-ni
mu-na-ru
Li ur U-ki-ag-ga- ni
mu-na-ni-tur
(dingir) jSur-{dingir) Sin
ud im-da-ab-gid-da
nam-ti-la-ni-ku
mu-na-1'u
In the Karzida
for ever,
the builder of . . .
for the preservation of his life,
Bur-Sin,
the beloved of Nannar,
bis splendid . . .
he has built ;
into his beloved abode
he has brought it.
Bur-Sin,.
for long days to come
for his life,
he has built it.
12. This date, published by Scheil, apparently belongs to Bur-Sin II. The
us-sa predicates another year ( = mu simple) to Bur-Sin II.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 2-Jl
lugal-a-ni-ir his king,
{dingir) Bur-^^'»ei*-). Sin, Bur- Sin,
5 En-lil-'^^'-a by the Nippurian
{dinffir) En-lil-U BSl
mu-pad-da called
SA 0-U$ to be the SA G-US
eXdingir) En-lil-ge of the temple of BSl,
I o nita^ lig-ga the mighty hero,
lugal Uru-um-^'-ma king of Ur,
lugal an-uh-da tab-tab-ba-ge king of the four corners of
the world,
nita^-azag the glorious hero
(dingir) En-lil-la{l) ofBgl,
15 KI-SAG-6UL-LA ihe KI-&AG-GUL-LA
(dingir) BurMingir) Sin-ka-ka of Bur-Sin
mu-na-an-DU he has erected.
4, 5. Bur^Sin En-lilM-a. The A after En-lil-ki has hwe to be taken for a—
a = ^c^ = *-;-, the gentilic ending : ' der Nippursche' Winckler translates :
' Bur-Sin aus Nippur ' may also be possible. Sometimes, as in O. B. I. 21, 6,
En-HlM-a stands after '\dingir) En-lil-li, which shows that En-lil-kt-a does
not belong to Bur-Sin, but to B61.
8. For SAG-US, see Br. 3581-85. Here probably a title designating
'protector.' Comp. also SAG- CIS, i. R. 2, No. 5, i, 2, 3; NE-Gll
{=^nita§), Lngalrag. i. 23 — all similar titles to the Assyr. 'iakkanakku.
15. The third sign is doubtful. Most probably it is the sign iul=iidiitu,
'joy.' KI-Sa G-GUL-LA would be the place of ' the joy of his heart,' which
he erected (JJU=gub = natdzu, Br. 4892) in honour of Bel. With this building
comp. also the E-GUL-6UL of Nabii-na'id.
O. B. I. 21 records the building of another house — a storehouse
for the sacrifices— as follows : —
{dingir) En-lil For BSl,
lugal kur-kur-ra the king of the lands,
higal ki-ag-ga-ni-ir his beloved king,
(dingir) Bur-(dingir) gm Bur-Sin,
272
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
5 (.dingir) En-lU-U
En-Ul-k'-a
mu-pad-da
SAG-U^
eXdingir) En-Ul-ka
10 lugal lig-ga
lugal Uru-um-^'-ma
lugal an-ub-da tab-tab-ba-ge
E LAL NI-NUN
B GESTIN
15 ki-SIGI&&E-SIGI&^E-
ra-na
NU-SILIG-GI
mu-na~an-ru
byBm
of Nippur
called
to he ihe SAG-U&
of the temple of B^l,
the mighty king,
king of Ur,
king of the four corners of
the world —
the house for honey, cream,
and wine,
a place for his sacrifices —
for the most powerful one
he has built.
13, 14. LAL = 'E.. C. 357 ; Br. 3339, diipu, ' Honig! The last two signs are
a ligature = JV/-7V6'jy; see Br. 5349, liimltu, cream.
GESTIN. This sign occurs again in Ur-Ba'u, vi. 5 ; see also Jensen, K. B. iii '.
p. 24, note 4. It is given in T. C. sub No. 85 as ' non assimiU! Thureau-Dangin
formerly (R. A. iv. p. 71, note 1) identified it with Br. 3338 = LAL ; so also
Amiaud. The former scholar, however, identifies it now correctly with Br. 5006
= kardnu (see E. C. 372 and note) — as such it is not identical with the sign AL,
occurring in Dec. 2**"', 4, 16, or even with the BI in mhgis ru-a-bi (Gudea D, iv.
11) — against Hilprecht, O. B. I. p. 253, note i. Lines 13 andi4maybetranslated
into Assyrian by bit dtifi iimlti ii kar&ni, i. e. ' the house for honey, cream,
and wine'; comp. also Abel and Winckler, Keilschrifttexte, Nabonidus, ii. i.
15. The second and third signs = Br. 9094; comp. Syl. '' 158 = sigiHe
= nikA, H. W. B. p. 479, ' sacrifice.' The RA contains the ' overhanging '
vowel. The correct reading of this sign, ending in R, is not yet known.
16. The second sign is SILIG, Br. 919. Comp. with this Br. 1965, {ding''')
NU-SILIG-GA; R. A. iv. No. 3, pi. i. No. i, env., iv. 3, LUGAL-
NU-SILIG (= a proper name); also Gudea, Cyl. B, iv. i, and Thureau-
Dangin, R. A. iv. p. 71, note i. Nu-silig-gi here undoubtedly refers back to
B61 ; as such then it takes up 1. i : For Bel . . . for the NU-SILIG he has
built. NU, Br. 1964, zikaru ; SILIG, Br. 920, iagapAru, H. W. B. 640,
mdchtig, stark, Mackthaber.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
To these texts has now to be added : —
273
E. A. H. 26 (soapstone), from Warka; has the same inscription as
C. T. 12156.
^ t=iW^ ^
ff^
g>
m^B^^' ^ F4d#ti
p:::^-
,^
//
P^
(rfj-K^rV) Innanna
\dingir) niti-dingirsi-an-na
nin-a-ni-ir
{.dtngir) Bur-(^''^e''''^ Sin
5 nita^ lig-ga
lugal Vru-um-^^-ma
To Ishtar,
the mistress of divine (exalted,
heavenly) power,
his lady,
Bur-Sin,
the mighty hero,
king of Ur,
2. For the expression (dingir) nin-dingir-si-an-na, comp. O. B. I. 16, i :
Dingir nin-Uru-um-^i'tna, The usual phrase is only nin-si-an-na (without
dingir), which is according to Br. \\a2%=ritar,
3. nin-a-ni-ir. Thus I prefer to read. The line is somewhat mutilated.
Possibly there stood only nin-a-ni.
6, In 11. 6 and ^ only a few signs are visible.
T
274 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
lugal an-ub-da tab-iab-ba-ge king of the four corners of
the world,
e-a-ni her house
mu-na-ru he has built.
Whether Gimil-Sin was the direct successor (Hilprecht, O. B. I.
p. 244, 16) of Bur-Sin II. is not yet settled ; see however above,
p. 27.
From O. B. I. 127 — a tablet which gives on the obverse the
dates of Bur-Sin II. and on the reverse some of those of Gimil-Sin
(comp. especially 1. 4) — it would seem that Gimil-Sin followed
immediately upon Bur-Sin II ^.
Scheil, however, has published in Rec. Trav. xix. p. 49 ' une
empreinte de cylindre sur une tableite de Telloh, n^ (read iv^)
dynastie d!Ur^ which reads :
(dtngir) ^ar-t'^'V^'-) Sin Bur-Sin,
niia^ lig-ga the mighty hero,
lugal Uru-um-'^'-ma the king of Ur,
lugal an-ub-da tab-tab king of the four corners of
the world,
5 Url^i»e''') Ba-u Ur-Ba'u
dumu-ni his son.
Here then we have a son of Bur- Sin II., whose name is Ur-Ba'u.
Whether this son ever ascended the throne of Ur is not evident.
We may however hypothetically place this Ur-Ba'u — whom we call
Ur-Ba'u II. to distinguish him from the older Ur-Ba'u, a patesi of
Shirpurla— among the kings of this dynasty of Ur. His reign may
' It shonld also be borne in mind that O. B. I. 127 does not give any ' mu-
ui-sa ' dates, while with the help of the E A. H. collection we were able to bring
in at least two of them. Besides this, O. B. I. 127 does not seem to give all the
dates belonging to Bur-Sin II. ; see above, dates Nos. i, 3 b, 10, 12, and note. It
is, therefore, very well possible that Ur-Ba'u II. has to be placed between Bnr-
Sin II. and Gimil-Sin, or that we have to supply a gap between these two latter
rulers, notwithstanding R. A. iv, p. 142 ; for the dates to be found on that tablet
occur almost under any ruler. Comp. e. g. Dungi III. dates No. 31 and No. 10
with Bur-Sin II. date No. 2 and note.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
275
have been very short. Probably some of the doubtful dates
(see below) may belong to this Ur-Ba'u 11.
However this may be, it is evident that no long interval could
have elapsed between Bur-Sin II. and Gimil-Sin ' (comp. O. B. I.
127.4)-
Dates of Gimil-Sin.
The following dates of the reign of Gimil-Sin have so far come
to light (comp. R. S. 1897, p. 73, and O. L. Z. i. 170):—
E. A. H. 91.
(i) mu '.di«sir) GmiU^'^S''-^ Sin In the year when Gimil-Sin be-
lugal came king.
(2) mu ma-dara-zu-ah ha-ab- In the year when the king conse-
gab crated the ship DARA-ZU-
AB.
gap
1, 2. These dates, together with Nos. 9 and 11 of the reign of Bur-Sin II.,
are mentioned on a tablet published by Thureau-Dangin in R. A. iii. p. 144.
Date No. 10 of Bur-Sin II. is not mentioned. It is therefore possible that
other dates, also lying between No. 1 1 of Bur-Sin II. and No. i of Gimil-Sin,
have to be postulated, which must then be referred to Ur-Ba'u II., son of Bur-
Sin II.
2. The identification of the sign DARA was for a long time doubtful. Thureau-
Dangin, R. A. iii. p. 143, 1. 8, thought ' c est feut-Hre une variante du No. 261
du tableau d'Amiaud.' This latter sign, however, occurs in its regular form on
a tablet of Dungi III. (O. B. I. 124, v. 20) in the expression AMAR-ANSU-
NA{D)-A ; see below, under ANSI/. Scheil, on the other hand, identified it
with KIN; see Rec. Trav. xvii. 38 ff. Thureau-Dangin, in O. L. Z. i. 179,
reads ' dara,' thus identifying it correctly with Br. 2946; see also E. C. 149
and p. no.
GAB. Thureau-Dangin thinks that the meaning of GAB is here =
-'Surru (H. W. B. 689, eroffnen, einiveihen) : ' dilier, c'est-i-dire entreprendre.
' Gimil-Sin=' present of Sin,' not Kat-Sin, 'hand of Sin,' is the pronuncia-
tion of this name. See Delitzsch, B. A. ii. p. 624; Thureau-Dangin, R. A. iii.
p. 124, 1. 6, against Hilprecht, Z. A. vii. 315, note i, and Assyriaca, p. 104,
note I.
T 2
276 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
(3) {a) mu Si-ma-LUM-''' ba- (a) In the year when (the king)
^ul devastated Simanu.
[b) mu- us-sa St-ma-tiu-um (b) One year after (the king)
iba-^uT) devastated Simanu.
E. A. H. 93.
(4) mu bad-mar-tu ba-ru In the year when (the king) built
the west wall.
(6) mu-u'i-sa bad-mar-tu ha-ru One year after (the king) built
the west wall.
O. B. 1. 127, rev. 2.
(6) mu na-ma^ (dingir) En-lil- In the year when (the king) made
la ba-ru the sublime inscription of Bll.
commencer.' GAB, according to Br. 4489 «= pitA ' To open a ship ' may
be = to make it ready for navigation. Comp. however O. B. I. 125, 4 : tiiu
mcl (.?) (dingir) Nin-lil-lafJ) ba- GAB, Here MA-GAB is equivalent to ' to open
a ship for Ninlil'=to consecrate it to her. The sense 'to consecrate' has
also to be postulated here. K. 4378, v. 28, mentions a (gii) MA-DARA-ZU-
AB, which it translates by : elip Ea. This ' ship of Ea ' we find also in
a variant of our date here, viz. C. T. 18427 : mu md-dara-zu-ab (dingir) En-
ki ba-ab-gab.
3, 4. These dates are found on a tablet published by Thureau-Dangin in
R. A. iii. p. 144.
The right reading of the city Si-ma-LUM is Si-ma-num, as is evident
from 3 b and Rec. Trav. xix. p. 57, No. 210. Comp. also da-LUM=
da-num.
5. This date reads as follows on a tablet published by Thureau-Dangin in
Rec. Trav. xix. p. 186 : —
mu-ui-sa (dingir) Gimil-^dingir) Sin lugal Uru-um-ki-ma-ge bad-mar-tu mu-
ri-ik Ti-id-ni-im mu-ru, i. e. one year after Gimil-Sin built the wall of the west
(called) ' murik Tidnim' i. e. which keeps away (off) Tidnu. With Tidnu,
which is according to Hommel=Tidanum, comp. Gudea B, vi. 13, Ti-da-num
gar-sag Mar-tu, and ii. R. 48, 12 c, d; ibid. 50, 58 c, d.
6. This date also occurs in the following forms : mu na ba-ru (Constantinople
762) ; mu (dingir) Gimil-(dingir) Sin lugal Uru-um-M-ma-ge na-mag i.dineir)
En-lil ih (dingir) JSTin-Hl mu-ne-ru, and with the variant na-ru-a for na,
Scheil, Rec. Trav. xvii. p. 38 ff. na-ru-a = Aisyt. narH.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 277
(7) mu(^i«sir) GimilMingir) Sin In the year when Gimil-Sin,
lugal Uru-um-k'-ma-ge king of Ur, devastated the land
ma-da Za-ap-sa-lt-'"' viu- of Zapshali.
^ul-a
(8) mu (dingir) Gimil-('i'»S'r) Sin In the year when Gimil-Sin,
lugal Uru-um-^'-ma-ge king of Ur, built the sublime
mh-gur-ma^ ('i'«ir'r) En- bark for BSl and Bglit.
HI (dingir) Nin-lil-ra mu-
ne-gim
(9) mu e ^di'^S'*'') . . ba-ru In the year when the king built
the temple of . . . (= the
god for Gii-uh-'"').
7. ma-dd = Assyt. mhtu. Zapshali, Hommel, A. H. T. p. 37 = 'Zapsha of
the Van inscriptions, and therefore probably situated in Cilicia or Armenia.'
Hilprecht's translation, ' In the year when (Gimil-Sin became king and)
Gimil-Sin brotight eyil upon the land of Zapshali ' (O. B. I. p. 245, note 6), is
inaccurate, because this year is not the first year of Gimil-Sin's reign.
8. Thus this date occurs in R. A. iii. p. 1 24. Sometimes we have only mu
mh-gur-mag ba-ru.
GUR = 'Y. C. 201. MJ-{GUIi) = hark; see Gudea D, iii. 3, and Jensen,
K. B. iii\ p. 52, note i and *.
9. The temple which Gimil-Sin built is that of the god of Gishuh. Indeed
some tablets bear the following inscription : Mu e f.(lingir) ! Gii-uli-ki ba-ru.
How the sign, which is composed of a square with inserted IGI, which latter
has the ^«««-signs, and which stands for the god of Gishuh, ought to be
pronounced, we do not know as yet. Comp. Cone of Entemena, col. i.
To the above-given dates ought also to be added one year in
which Gimil-Sin built for Uru-ki the E-MU-RI{?)-A-NA-
BA . . ., as testified to by Peters, Nippur, ii. p. 239 ; also in
Hilprecht, Bible Helps, pi. 25 :
(dingir) Uru-ki For Nannar,
dumu-sag the firstborn
(dtngir-) En-lil-la{t) of Bgl,
lugal ki-ag-ga-ni-ir his beloved king,
5 (dingir) GimiU'^'"^''') Sin Gimil-Sin,
ki-ag-('''"S'i'') Uru-ki the beloved of Nannar,
278 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
lugal {dingir) \En\-lil-li a king whom B^l
^ag-ga-na in his heart
in-pad has called
10 sib kalam-ma to be the shepherd of the world
'^a an-uh-da tab-tab-ba-ku and of the four corners of the
world,
lugal lig-ga the mighty king,
lugal Uru-um-^'-ma king of Ur,
lugal an-tib-da tab-lab-\ba-ge\ king of the four corners of the
world,
^ MU-RI (?)-A-NA- the . . .
£A . . .
e ki-a^'-ga-m his beloved house
mu-na-rij he has built.
Dates of Ine-Sin.
The successor of Gimil-Sin was Ine-Sin '- In R. A. iii. p. 144,
Thureau-Dangin pubUshed a tablet which mentions the following
dates : —
mu vih-gur-mag ba-ru (= Gimil-Sin No. 8).
mu e {^'"?ir) f ha-ru (=Gimil-Sin No. 9).
mu {dingir) J-neAdingir) gi„ [lugal].
Hence ' the year when Ine-Sin became king ' follows upon date
No. 9 of the reign of Gimil-Sin. This succession is corroborated
by Constantinople No. 762 and No. 831 (see R. S. 1897, p. 74;
R. A. iii. p. 144).
The following dates may occur during the reign of Ine-Sin,
according to Constantinople No. 762 : —
' The correct reading of this name is not yet certain. Hilprecht, Assyriaca,
p. 104, note I, reads: I-ne-Sin, 'the eye of Sin.' Others, I-bil-Sin or I-bi-
Sin. See Delitzsch, B. A. ii. 626 ; Thurean-Dangin, R. A. iii. p. 126.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 279
(i) mu {dingir) I-ne-idingir) Sin In the year when Ine-Sin became
Itigal king.
(2) mu en '^ingtr) Innanna ba- In the year when (the) king was
iug invested high-priest of Ishtar.
Uncertain Dates.
The foOowing dates also belong to the members of the third
dynasty of Ur, but cannot yet be referred to definite kings : —
E. A. H. 105,
( 1 ) [mu du]mu-sal lugal pa-te- In the year when the daughter
si [Za-a\p-sa-li-^'-ge ha- of the king became (sic) pa-
an-tug tesi of Zapshali.
E. A. H. 106.
(2) mu-us-sa Lu-lu-bu-um-''' ba- One year after (the king) de-
^ul vastated Lulubu.
E. A. H. 107.
(3) mu ffu-hu-nu-ri-^' ba-gul In the year when (the king) de-
vastated Huhunuri.
1 . Comp. Dnngi III. dates, No. 33, where a daughter of Dungi III. becomes
patesi of Anshan. Zapshali was devastated by Gimil-Sin (date No. 7) ; here
a daughter of one of our kings becomes its patesi. Hommel, A. H. T. p, 37,
refers this date to Dungi III.
2. For Lulubu, comp. Dungi III. dates. No. 47 «, where it is mentioned in
connection with Simuru. The mu-ui-sa presupposes a year in which the
actual defeat took place.
3. For the name Hu-Jju-nu-riM the following variants may be found
(Scheil, Z. A. xii. p. 258) : Qu-^u-nu-ru-ki ^ ffu-^u-ru-H, Hu-VD + BANi?)-
nu-ri-^i, Hu-BAA^ {?)-nu-ri-^'. Scheil therefore concludes that the sign in
question — which also occurs in gS-BAJV {?)-/''— has to be read I/ff; Jffu-
BAJV{?)-nu-ri-i'=fftt-Uff-mi-ri-ki,a.nAGi^-BAN-iihe^a.nts\.oxe3iAGii-ui-l'i,
See also above, p. 74,. note i, and comp. also the note in Delitzsch, A. L*.
p. 28, where, according to K. 3622 and 4871, the pronunciation of Uff is
28o
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
E. A. H. io8, 109.
(4) mu-en nam-? (dingir) Bun-gi- In the year when (the king) was
ra-ge ba-DU ba-iug appointed and invested high-
priest of the cult (?) of Dungi.
(5) mu-ul-sa HarM-^' Ktmas-^'
ffumurii-^^ ba-^ul
Rec. Trav. xvii. p. 38.
One year after (the king) de-
vastated Harshi, Kimash, and
Humurti.
Rec. Trav. xix. p. 60, No. 615.
(6) mu en-gu-gal An-na (■^'"i"''') In the year when (the king) was
Innanna ba-iug
invested lord most high of
Anu and Ishtar.
ki-is-'sa ani ii-e-Hl This same sign BAN{f) occurs also in O. B. I.
127, 7 (see dates of Bur-Sin, No. 8) : Ri-BAN-nu-^u-ki. Scheil, 1. c, wishes
to read this name = ffu-u^-nu-ri-^'. So very correctly. Apparently the
scribe misplaced the two signs i?/and ffU. Hommel, P. S. B. A. xxi. p. 135,
reads for NU = tar. The 7Vi7 however is clear here.
4. The sign after NAM occurs also in O. B. I. 87, iii. 17 : (dingir) En-lil
. nam-?-mu ge-na-bi, which Thureau-Dangin translates : ' que Enlil . . .
mon sort dicrHe ' ; but adds in a note : ' traduction est hypothitique.^
Further also in Gudea, Cyl. B, viii. 10; xi. 13; and in C. T. 18343, xi.
37 : a-'iag La-za-pi M a-'Sag nam-? gub-ha. Here it is said that our king
was ba-DU and invested ' high-priest of the nam-% ' The (di'V'r) Dungi, as we
shall see, is Dungi III.-, who was deified and received worship, as also was the
case with Bnr-Sin II. and Gimil-Sin. Nam-% may therefore mean worship,
cult, and the en-nam-^ = the one who had to arrange this worship. This also
would be in accordance with Lugalzaggisi's prayer that B^l may honour him
with a certain cult.
i? Z7 = gub — nazdzu, i. e. ' to put up ' in the sense of ' to appoint.' Comp.
also DU'=gin = kdnu. BA-DU BA-TUG — ' (when the king) wasappointed,
and invested lord,' &c.
5. :garshi and Humurti were mentioned together above, dates of Dungi III.,
No. 51 ; Kimash and ^nmurti under Dungi III. dates, No. 49. ^arshi and
Humurti are probably situated in the neighbourhood of Kimash, i. e. Central
Arabia.
6. GU-GAL. See Br. 3284, aiaridu ; 3285, gugallu, H. W. B. J94.
Hence en-gu-gal may be parallel to en-mag-gal. Comp. Bur-Sin II. dates.
No. 5.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 281
Rec. Trav. xix. p. 61.
(7) mu KIB-KIB-SE Sir-pur- Annie ou tabondante moisson de
la-''' GI^-NE-RA-A Shirpurlafut aniantte par I'in-
ondation.
To these uncertain dates ought to be added also the following : —
(8 a) mu e-gal^^'*'S'^'^ Bur-^^'"sir) In the year when (the king) was
Sin ki-ag i'l'^e'^'i en installed in the palace of Bur-
Eridug-''' ba-tug Sin, the beloved of the divine
lord (i.e. the god) of Eridu.
(8 h) mu en-nun-ni (^'"e'l^) Bur- In the year when (the king) was
(dingtr) Sin-ra ki-ag en installed by Bur-Sin, the be-
Eridug-^' ba-a-tug loved of the lord of Eridu, to
be his (i.e. Bur-Sin's) high-
priest,
(8 c) mu en-nun-gal An-na ki-ag In the year when (the king) was
{.dingir) Bur-i^i'^s'''') Sin installed priest most high of
en Eridug-^' ba-tug Anu, beloved of Bur-Sin, the
lord of Eridu.
7. Thus Scheil translates and compares KIB-KIB-KI: du^^udu Ja mirsi ;
RA : ra^diu, Br. 5219, 6361.
8 a. This date occurs on C. T. 94-10-16, 5. It is clearly against
Thureau-Dangin's translation, i. e. the king himself does not install, invest,
but is installed; see also above, dates of Dungi III., No. 16. Apparently
this date is only a variant of No. 8 b. The post-position RA shows clearly that a
king was installed or invested by Bur-Sin. Hence we have here the important
historical fact that Bur-Sin II. had during his reign a ' MitregentJ which latter
may have been his son Ur-Ba'u II.
8 b. Occurs on C. T. 95-10-12, 20. En-nunni. If the NI be correct
we only can translate : (to be) his high-priest. This is favoured by date No. Sir.
8 c. Occurs on C. T. 14606, and is an amplification of Nos. 8 a and b,
telling us in what the (nam)-en-nun consisted, viz. in the high-priestship of
Ann. If we would combine a-c we possibly might read : mu e-gal (dingir) Bur-
(ditigir) Sin ki-ag dingir en Eridug-ki en-nun-gal-ni An-na (dingir) Bur-(.dingir)
Sin-ra ba-ia)-tug, i. e. in the year when (the king, i. c. Ur-Ba'u II.) was installed
in the palace of Bur-Sin, the beloved of the divine lord of Eridu, by Bur-Sin, to
be his (Bur-Sin's) priest most high before Anu. See also what has been said
sztb Bur-Sin II. dates, No. 5, note, and compare also the shortened form of
282 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
No. 8 c in C. T. 94-10-16, 59 : tiiu en-nun-ra ba-tiig, i.e. in the year when
(the Icing) was installed as {rd) high-priest.
From the above-given dates it is evident that we must postulate for
the reign of Dungi III. at least fifty-one years, and if vs^e take
Nos. 47 b and 50 3 as representing two independent years, we would
have to presuppose a reign of fifty-three years for this ruler. He,
like Bur-Sin II., paid more attention to the gods than to the hostile
nations, yet was, no doubt, the greatest of all the rulers of this
dynasty. We have to see in him not only a notable builder and
military hero, but also a great statesman. After having performed
his obligation towards his gods by building or restoring temples
in their honour, and by taking upon himself the different offices
connected with the cult of his favoured gods, he placed one of his
daughters on the throne of the city of Marhashi (= Mar' ash in
Northern Syria), probably in order to make peace with that city,
after having waged war against it. He repeated this experiment
with Anshan (in Elam). But the Elamites could not endure this
' new queen' ; they promptly rebelled, and four years later Dungi III.
found it necessary to subdue the revolt. The enemies of Ur must
have succeeded in reaching even the walls of the royal capital, for
Dungi III. ' restores the wall of the place,' and assembles or enlists
all the inhabitants of Ur, ' great and mighty soldiers,' in order to drive
away the enemy from his royal capital. However, peace was very
soon again disturbed. Karhar and Simurru — both places were
situated in the west — rebelled. Also Harshi — probably the neigh-
bouring state to Simurru — could not bear any longer the ' lordship '
of the daughter of the king; it rebelled, but was severely punished.
These victories do not seem to have been permanent, for very soon
the king found it necessary to punish Simurru again. Having sub-
jugated the west, he now turned his attention to the east, i. e. Elam,
and especially Anshan. Peace supreme seems to have reigned
for a short time, giving the king time to continue his buildings and
perform his religious obligations. His victories over Anshan must
have been so decisive that even ' a temple ' was built for him, where
he was to be worshipped as 'god Dungi.' However, for only six years
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 283
did he enjoy this quietude. Shashru rebelled, but was subjugated.
This rebellion of Shashru gave a new stimulus to Simurru, which
however felt too weak to undertake the rebellion alone, seeing that it
had been defeated eight times. It therefore incited Lulubu in the north
to lift up arms, thus trying to split up the armies of the king, and
make him wage war on two different places at the same time.
The king became master of the situation. He not only over-
powered the west (for the ninth time), but even the north had to
yield to his mighty weapons. After one year's peace, during which
time the king no doubt strengthened his armies, he felt strong
enough to complete the conquest of the four corners of the world.
He had, as we have seen, already conquered the west, the east,
and the north. Only the south remained. Thus it happened that
he had to lead his victorious armies also against Kimash in Southern
Arabia. Kimash allied itself with Humurti ; both are overcome.
The four corners of the world do homage to Dungi III.
Of the reign of Bur-Sin If. we covered fourteen years. (Date
No. 12, e.g., shows that another year has to be postulated.) Hil-
precht may not be wrong when he says (O. B. I. 245, note 6) :
' Bur-Sin ... in all probability . . . reigned sixteen or eighteen
years. He seems to have been a peaceful prince, devoting himself
chiefly to buildings and religious functions. Only three campaigns
occurred during his reign, viz. against Urbillum, Shashru, and
Huhnuri.' His last years were taken up by religious duties. If
our translation of ' uncertain dates,' No. 8 a-c, be correct, it would
seem that he had a co-regent during the latter years of his reign.
This co-regent was in all probability Ur-Ba'u II., of whom in other
respects we know absolutely nothing.
Gimil-Sin found it necessary after a certain number of years to
fortify the royal city again against his enemies — probably Elam
(O. B. I. 246 ff.), in which country several of the cities and districts
against which these kings made war were also situated. During
his reign, which probably covered a period of fifteen years (of ten
years we have dates), two campaigns occurred, viz. against Simanu
and Zapshali.
284 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
For Idin-Dagan, whom Hilprecht (R. R. B. L. p. 84) places here,
see above sub Nisin.
Of the ' uncertain dates ' some may belong to the rulers above
mentioned, others to those not yet known V
From these different dates we can now determine accurately the
extent of the dominion of the rulers of this dynasty.
The title of these kings clearly indicates, if taken literally,
a dominion as extensive as that of Naram-Sin. Naram-Sin called
himself Jfar ki-ib-ra-tim ar-ba-im (O. B. I. 120, ii.), thus claiming to
be ruler over a territory which extended from the Persian Gulf in
the south to the mountains of Armenia in the north, from the
Elamite mountains in the east to the Mediterranean Sea in the west.
Can we prove that the representatives of this dynasty, who also,
like Naram-Sin, ascribed to themselves the proud title, ^ar ki-ib-
ra-tim ar-ba-im (Dungi III), or in Sumerian lugal an-ub-da tab-tab-
ba, really possessed a dominion as extensive as that of Naram-
Sin, i. e. a kingship of the four corners of the world ? Hommel, in
A. H. T. p. 36, maintains : ' It is evident that they (i. e. the kings
of the fourth dynasty of Ur) only held sway over a smaller part of
Babylonia ; they no longer possessed Ingi (i. e. Kengi), and had
lost Akkad as well. . . . They made up for this loss, however, by
extending their rule over Elam, Arabia, and the countries of the
west, and for this reason described themselves by the proud title of
" kings of the four cardinal points." '
That these kings held sway not only over a ' smaller part,' but
over the whole of Babylonia, is evident from the following
facts : —
Bur-Sin II. tells us that he was invested ' lord of Eridug-''',' i. e.
Eridu (E. A. H. 87, 88, dates Nos. 9, 10; comp. also Dungi III.
dates, Nos. 31, 32). Eridu being situated in the extreme south of
Babylonia, on the Persian Gulf, was thus under the sway of these
rulers. Girsu, Erim, and Nin^— all of which are parts of Shirpurla
' A king's son I found mentioned also on C. T. 21335, vi. 175 : MU-E-
AN-NA dumu lugal.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 285
— were in their possession (comp. E. A. H. 14, 28, ^ag Gir-su-'''
and lag Nind-^', and C. T. 95-10-12, 20). And if we accept the
identity of Kengi = Girsu '■ (as was shown above), these kings also
ruled over Kengi. But even if this were not the case, we can
show that their dominion extended over the whole of South Baby-
lonia. The representative cities of South Babylonia are, besides
Girsu and Eridu, Uruk, Mar, Gishuh, Nippur.
For Uruk, comp. Z. A. xii. p. 268 a, and see above, E. A. H. 26 ;
for Mar, comp. E. A. H. 36, 16-28 ; for Gishuh, E. A. H. 134, 5 ;
for Nippur, O. B. I. 20, 21, and passim. All these cities are
mentioned on tablets dated from the reigns of the different
members of this dynasty. It is evident, therefore, that these kings
possessed the whole of South Babylonia from Nippur down to
Eridu.
But in addition to the south they included also the north in their
wide dominion. Among the Nofth Babylonian cities mentioned
on the E. A. H. tablets we find A'/-««-«z>--^' = Borsippa, KA-
DINGIR-^' = Babylon, and Kutha. It is true that no mention
occurs in these tablets of the city of Agade, but E. A. H. 27
is a tablet dated from Lulubu in the extreme north of Babylon
(comp. also the different campaigns against Lulubu). This would
seem to justify us in holding that these kings possessed the whole
of North Babylonia, their dominion extending to the mountains of
Armenia. They also held sway over Elam (Anshan), Arabia {Kt-
MA^), even over Syria and the countries of the west (KA
SAL-LU). Hence their kingdom was indeed ' a kingdom of the
four corners of the world,' comprising the whole of Babylonia south
and north, consequently also Shumer and Akkad, and thus it was
in no way unlike that of Naram-Sin (comp. also Hilprecht, O. B. I.
246, 4).
How long this kingship of ' the four corners of the world '
remained unharmed we can only conjecture. For it seems that at
about 2400 B.C. (Lehmann, Zwei Probleme, Tabelle i., 2360 B.C.)
this ' kingship of the four corners of the world ' was overthro-wn by
' But notice especially Ur-(dintir) KAL, the patesi of Girsu, and see above.
286 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
a certain Sumuabi, the first king of the dynasty of Babylon, and
a predecessor of Hammurabi. Encouraged by the success of the
north (Babylon), the south also rebelled, under Nflr-Ramman, who
in consequence of his victories founded the kingdom of Lana.
Nflr-Rammin was succeeded by his son Siniddina (K. B. iii'. p. 91),
who calls himself ' king of Larsa and king of Shumer and Akkad.'
This is noteworthy. The kings of Babylon, as well as Nflr-
Ramman, confined their rebellion primarily to their own respective
cities. Siniddina was not content with this ; he wanted to extend
his dominion over Shumer and Akkad, and succeeded in doing
this. However his success was to be checked. Elam, which for
a long time had been the deadly enemy of Dungi III. and his suc-
cessors, was bound to take a hand in the game that went on in
Babylonia. It had acquired in the meantime some strength, and
invaded the south of Babylonia under Kudurnanhundi I. at about
2300 B.C., and under Kudurdugmal' 09J'?1'7? (?))• They even
succeeded in estabUshing in Larsa a kingdom of their own under
Rim-Sin (= Eri-Aku = 'Hi''!^), a contemporary and former satrap of
Kudurdugmal ^, and who adopted the same title which Siniddina
bore. This invasion took place while Siniddina was sitting upon
the throne of Larsa, and while Hammurabi (= ■'$1'?^, 2288-2223 ;
Lehmann, 2248-2194) was reigning in Babylon. Siniddina in
his distress implores the help of Hammurabi ; the latter grants it,
and overpowers Rim-Sin (K. B. iii \ p. 127, No. i) : 'In the
month Shebat, on the twenty-third (twenty-second) day, in the year
when king Hammurabi in the power of Anu and Bel established
his (their?) sh^ga, and when his hand cast down to the ground
the adda of lamndbalum ' (see Winckler, 1. c, p. 127, note *, and
ibid. p. 95, 2, col. i. 9) ' and the king Rim-Sin.'
Thus we see that the ' kingship of the four corners of the world '
was torn up by Babylon in the north, and by Larsa in the south.
' His name is written either KU-KU-KU-mal ( = Ku-dtir-dug-mal') or KU-
KU-KU-KU-mal {_= Ku-dur-Jug-gu-mal'). The syllables '(^«^-oto/' are in
all probability only a variant for ' Lag{a)-mar^
' And of Kndurnanhnndi I.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 287
This confusion brought in the Elamites, who tried to establish in
Southern Babylonia a new kingdom, but were defeated by Ham-
murabi and Siniddina, which former ruler then eventually became
king of the whole of Babylonia, nay, even ' king of the four corners
■ of the world,' and thus a successor of the fourth dynasty of Ur in
extent of dominion as well as in title.
The Names of the Months.
In connection with the dates of these rulers, it would be of
interest to notice the names given to the several months of the year.
Three distinct nomenclatures seem to have been current at this
time. The following months, which we arrange according to
Thureau-Dangin in R. A. iv. p. 83 (comp. also Journal Asiatique,
mars — avril, 1896, p. 339 fF., and R. A. iv. No. iii, tablet 77), occur
most often in the subscription to be found on the tablets of the
E. A. H. Collection ; and a comparison with those of the time of
Sargon I. will show that they are to a large extent relics of the
oldest nomenclature :
Time of Sargon I. Time of the fourth d)masty of Ur.
Ilu EZEN &E-IL-LA liu &E-IL-LA ; E. A. H. 76.
liu EZEN GAN-MA& Ilu GAN-MA&; Nos. 82, 145,
146.
Itu EZEN GUD-DU-NE- Ilu GUD-DU-NE-SAR-SAR;
SAR-SAR' No. 144-
Ilu EZEN ^dingir) NE-Stf Itu EZEN kdingir) NE-SU^.
■ Sometimes also Itu GVD-NE-SAR-\SAR'\ or liu GUD-A-NE-SAR-
{SAR'].
^ Thureau-Dangin, \. ^. . ' Pour la place de ce mots st celle liu suivant, f.
Rec. Trav. xix. p. 186, note 2. Le signe que je transcris Stl se confond dans
r icriture posiMeure avec le signe DAR.'
5 Thus in E. A. H. 27, 57, 143, 151 ; or only Itu (dingir) NE-SC/, as in
E. A. H. 88, 06.
288 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
5 llu&U-KUL^.
Hu EZEN ZIB-KU Itu ZIB-Kt; Nos. 75, 77, 81,
139-
Itu EZENidingiy) DUMU- Itu EZEN ('''V''-) DUMU-ZI ;
ZI Nos. 12, 17,66, 95, 152.
Itu EZEN (d'^sir) DUN-GI;
Nos. 68, 78, 84, 149.
Itu EZEN (dinsrir) ;BA-U Itu EZEN '^^'"sir) BA-U; Nos.
ii3> i4i> 148.
' Thus in E. A. H. 107, 140, 142, 150. In E. A. H. 61 we have Itu-SU-
KUL-LI. In later Assyrian times this month was the fourth. Thureau-
Dangin, Rec. Trav. xix. p. 186, note 2, thought : ' les places des mots SU-KUL
et EZEN {dingir) NE-SIJ doivent Hre ititerverties.'
That the month SU-KUL has to retain its place after the month itu EZEN
{dingir) NE-S(/k evident from C. T. 18343, col. ix. 25 ff. :
40 (ia) itu EZENVingir) NE-Sl7-ta
150 \kd) itu ^U-KUL-ta
60 (te) itu EZEN (dingir) Dun-gi-ta
60 (ia) itu EZEN (dingir) Ba-u-ta
itu ^E-IL-LA-ku
"se-bi 9 gur 20 (ka)
itu II kam
itu-dir la-em iag-ba-ni-ghl
which latter passages can only be translated as follows : —
40 (Jta of grain = "se) from the month EZEN (dingir) 1^£.
SU {scil. for every month up to SE-IL-LA), i. c. for
eleven months ; hence 40 x 1 1 = 440
150 {ka of grain) from the month SU-KUL {scil. for every
month up to SE-IL-LA), i. e. for ten months ; hence
150 X 10 = 1500
60 {ka of grain) from the month EZEN (dingir) Dun-gi
{scil. for every month up to SE-IL-LA), i. e. for seven
months ; hence 60 x J = 420
60 {ka of grain) from the month EZEN (dingir) Ba-u {scil.
for every month up to ^E-IL-LA), i. e. for six
months ; hence 60 x 6 = 360
Sunima { = its grain is) = 9 gur 20 ka or i gur = 300 ka
(see A. B. P. R. p. ioi)= 2720 ka
during eleven months, among which is one intercalary month (i. e. the Itu
DIR §E-KIN-KUD). If itu SU-KUL were put before itu EZEN (dingir)
NE-SU, the ' siimma ' would be quite different.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY ' 289
10 ItuMU-^U-GAB IiuMU-^U-UL;'iios.g2,ii>j.
liu EZEN AMAR-A-SI Itu AMAR-A-A-SI ; Nos. 7, 59,
99, 149.
Ilu SE-KIN-KUD; Nos. 2-6,
8, II, 70-72, 8s, 147-
■ • " Itu DIR ^E-KIN-KUD; No.
67.
To the period of Sargon I. belong also the following
names : —
(i) Itu ^E-^E-KIN-A, which probably is another form
(Thureau-Dangin) for Itu SE-KIN-KUD ; (2) Itu ^ID-EN-DU-
&E-A-NA (see R. A, iv. No. iii. tablet No. 42) ; (3) arah ffa-
ni-t; (4) arah Ba-hi-ir arkU; (5) arah Za-bit-tum, 'qui' (i.e.
Nos. 3-5) peuvent etre consider e's comme les noms en usage
plus au nord en pays d! Accad' (Thureau-Dangin, 1. c,
p. 84).
A glance over the above^given dates will show that the names of
the months — to a great part at least — are chosen according to
the season in which they fell. Comp. e. g. GAN-MA&, 'field (in)
blossom'; & U-K UL, ' sovtins' ; ^E-EIN-EUB,' gTa.mha.Tyest' ;
SE-IL-LA, 'grain-grown.' A similar nomenclature — where the
months are called after the season — has come down to us in four
Canaanitish names. They are :
1. D''3ns<n rrv (i Reg. viii. 2), generally explained as ' der Monat
der fliessenden Bache ' ; was originally the first, later on the seventh
month = nf".
2. -"13 rrv I Reg. vi. 38 — ?13; here either nom. propr.
(comp. ?1312t, 'i]"i3P13) or proventus, ' Erzeugnis, Frucht ' ;
originally the second, later the eighth month = fJB'n'lO.
3. 3''5N, or more completely 3''3*?f1 B'^.n (Ex. xiii. 4 ; xxiii. 15 ;
xxxiv. 18; Deut. xvi. i), i.e. 'the month of the ears of the corn.'
It was originally the seventh, but later on became the first month
of the year = |p'3.
4. 11 (i Reg. vi. I, 37), or more fully, according to Targ.,.1''] tTV,
u
290 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
^?^h ' t^ie month of the beauty (of the flowers) '; originally the eighth,
but later on became the second month = IJX.
What seasons or, better, months of our time would correspond
to the names of the months above given ?
A good starting-point for determining this is given by the month
^E-KIN-KVD.
SE-KIN-KUD, or harvest-month, is made the same by the
later Assyrians as Addaru (comp. Delitzsch, A. L'. p. 93). The
Hebrews, who adopted the nomenclature of the Assyrians, called
it">lS< (see Schrader, Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament.p. 379);
the same name is also to be found in E. A. H. 134 (see below).
We know however that the month Addaru, 11^, fell in February-
March (see Hommel, article ' Babylonia ' in Hastings' Dictionary
of the Bible, vol. i. p. 217). The month SE-IL-LA, which follows
upon i(^-^/7V--A'£/Z), corresponding to the Assyr.-HebrewiVMa«»«,
I?'?, would fall in March-April, and GAN-MA^ = Ks%jv.-B.thre\<i
Aim, "IJK, in April-May. With this agrees exactly the Canaanitish
nomenclature. We have seen that fO'? corresponds to the old
3'3N, hence it must be also = &E-IL-LA, which is also proved by
the meaning of the respective names : &E-IL-LA, ' grain-grow(n),'
3*3K, ' (monrii of) the ear of the grain ' ; and Aim, y» = GAN-
MA& = ' field (in) blossom' = 1J, ' beauty (of the flowers).' We
have to establish the following two important similarities between
the Canaanitish and our nomenclature here : —
1. In both we have the same succession, viz. :
&E-KIN'KUD SE-IL-LA GAN-MA&
["11??] 3'?K n
2. In both the same meaning :
' grain-harvest ' ' grain-grow(n) ' ' field in blossom '
' ear of the corn ' ' beauty (of flowers) '
These similarities lead us to suppose that :
^IT}^ = itu EZEN-i'i''''£''*-) Dumu-zi = September-October.
^« = ilu EZEN-^dingir) Dun-gi = October-November.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 291
In the Assyrian nomenclature we meet again the following
names : —
&E-KIN-KUD = Addaru, -m^
iU-KUL = Du'uzu, t1»ri.
But here we have one difficulty. Above we have seen that t
&E-KIN-KUD = TlX, Addaru = February-March.
^E-IL-LA = 3'?N = '|p*3, Nisannu = March-April.
GAN-MA& = 11 = 1;n, Aim = April-May.
Hence if we continue the successive six months as given on hand
by Ur IV,, we would have
GUD-DU-NE:-SAR-SAR = fvp, Simdm = May-June.
EZEN (*''^''') NiJ-St = June-July.
&U-KUL = Dtiuzu, 11«2P1 = July-August.
But Du'uzu, llisn, is = June- July 1
Now it might be said that we ought not to make the month
SE-KIN-KUD the starting-point in determining the mason which
corresponds to the names of the month, but the month &U-KUL,
In this case we would get the following equation! — SU-KUL =
Du'uzu, WPI = June-July,' and because, according to Ur IV.,
we have six months between the former and SE^KIN-KUD,
this latter falls in January-February, but it ought to be in
February-March. Hence if we want to keep SU-KUL-= Du uzu=.
TOFI = fourth month = June-July, and ^E-KIN-KUD = Addaru ^
nis = twelfth month, we have to suppose that at some time the
above-given arrangement of the months was changed, i. e. that the
time from &U-KUL to ^E-KIN-KUD embraced seven instead
of six months, or that &U-KUL became the fourth month of the
year.
The above indicated difficulty is increased by E. A. H. 143, which
gives us a completely different nomenclature for the months.
Thureau-Dangin (1. c.) already mentioned this fact, giving the two
names Itu A-ki-ti and Itu Ezen (*«*•'■'") An-na with the remark, ' on
trouve cependant la trace dune nomenclature differ enk'.
E. A. H. 134 is remarkable in more than one respect. It gives
U 2
292 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
US the names of twelve months, every month being assigned to 'the
patesi of a different city \ During this month the patesi so men-
tioned had probably to perform certain religious duties. So we
find, e. g., that during the month of the festival of Dungi the
'patesi of the festival of Dungi,' PA? MU-U-LU, the mighty
LU(jr, officiated (see rev. 13, 14). The patesi of Girsu-^' was
performing religious duties during four months (see 11. 1-3 and
10-12). Once we meet, instead of the patesi, the PA-AL=.
iabrii as the officiating person. This pa-al was that of Ur; he
officiated in the 'month of the great festival.' This statement is
sign,ificant (11. 17, 18). Every king is also a patesi. The patesi
of Ur would be the king of Ur, but he does not oflSciate; he
has his servants; hence the PA-AL of Ur takes the king's place.
It is also remarkable that this tablet begins with the month
SE-KIN-KUD, which in the above-given arrangement (called by
us List A) we put last. Supposing, as we must do, that E. A. H.
134 (called by us List B) is arranged according to a certain order —
the repetition of ' pa-te^si Girsu-''' ' shows this — we find the following
difference between A and B : —
In A, SE^KIN-KUD = 12th,
In B, „ „ ist,
both nomenclatures having been used at one and the same time,
as is apparent from E. A. H. 87 : i/u Ezen-ma^ mu en Urudug-^'
ba-iug-ga ; E. A. H. 109 : Itu KI-KIN (/=) (H'^gi'-') Nin-a-zu mu en
nam- ? i^'^eiA Dun-gi-ra-ge ba-DU ba-iug ; and R. A. iv. iii. pi.
xxix. No. 78, Endroit 6, 7 : iiu A-M-ti mu Si-mu-ru-um-^' Lu-lu-bu-
um-'^' a-du X-lal-i ba-^ul-a. This latter tablet is interesting. Only
three months are mentioned there : A-M-ti, ^E-KIN-KUD, and
' Comp. a similar arrangement of the months according to lands In ii. R. 49,
I, cols. I and 2, 11. 7 £f. :
Itu bAR-AZA G {sic)-GAIi itu GUD NIM-MA (i. c. Elamtu)-ki
/i;« [broken away] itu MAR-TV-k'
\Itu broken away] \itu\ ICU? GU-TI-I
\liu ] \Itu . . .] GIM
{Itu ] [/^« . . . .] IS
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 293
DIR SE-KIN-KUD, i. e. the seventh and first (first intercalary)
months.
How can we then reconcile A with B, or which of the months
was the first ?
In List A, where the succession is established beyond doubt,
Thureau-Dangin formerly made — without giving further reasons —
the month &E-IL-LA the first (R. A. iv. 83), but later on changed
his view and began the year with itu GAN-MAS{0. L. Z. i. 163 ff.),
because certain tablets of C. T. reckoned: itu GAN-MAS-ta . . ■
itu SE-IL-LA-ku (see e.g. C. T. 18358, col. vi. ; 18343, col. iii.
30, 35. 40-45. &c-)-
That the year could not have begun with GAN-MAS, but must
■have commenced with SE-IL-LA, is apparent from the following
reasons ; —
1. In legal documents or records any month of the year may
be made the starting-point for determining a certain period. Thus,
e. g., in Neo-Babylonian contract-tablets the months differ according
to the contents of those respective tablets : when dates are to be
returned Tiirttu is the month; when grain, Aim; and when figs
and grapes, Du'uzu.
2. One tablet is known to me which reckons (C. T. 17752,
iv. 5): //u Amar-a-a-si Sa-as-ru-um-^' ba-^ul-ta itu Amar-a-a-si
mu en i4'''g'i'') Uru-ki mas-e-ni-pad-ku, but it would be wrong to
make, on account of that, the month Amar-a-a-si the first one of
the year.
3. Above we have seen that only two months are common to A
and B, viz. SE-KIN-KUD and EZEN ^dingir) Bun-gi. In trying
to reconcile both lists we might take as basis either the former or
the latter month.
SE-KIN-KUD, it may be said, is in later times the twelfth
month, hence probably also at this period. If that were true we
would get the following equation :—
SE-KIN-KUD=lvit\h\i month = A 12 =B i, which latter would
have to be put at the end of that list. But against this is —
{a) The arrangement of List B itself.
294
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
{b) EZEN ^'''"eir) Dun-gioi B would become the seventh, white
in A it is the eighth month.
(f) V. R. 43 — a list of months written in two columns.
On the left side (first column) of this list we find, with the
exception of the first, six names for every month, which are
identified on the right side (second column) with the Neo-Assyrian
months. A closer examination of the first of those six names
(called by us List C) reveals our List B — showing that SE-KIN-
KUD must have been the first, EZEN (*»^'') Dun-gi the eighth,
and EZEN-ME-KI-GAL the last or twelfth month respectively.
Also the third names (called by us List D) a,re interesting. We
have to see in them a relic of List A, and of the names that were
in use at the time of Gudea. May I be allowed to give the transcrip-
tion of Lists C and D, with their Neo-Assyrian equivalents, here :
V. R. 43.
Column II : Neo-Assyrian
names.
Column I, List C.
Column I, List D.
I. BAR-AZAG =
Broken away
Name not given
Ni-sa-an-nu
Has to be completed,
according to B, to SE-
KIN-KUD.
Is Itu GAN-MAS to be
supplied ?
2. GUD-SI-ni =
A-a-ru
...KU
. . . SI{!) - SAR '
SAR
^.&EG-GA=Si-ma-
nu
Has to be completed to
BAR-AZAG-Ki;.
SI'I-TAN (written
UR)
In this name we recognize
no doubt the GUD-
NE-SAR-SAR—only
the second half oi ME
being preserved in the
copyl
EZEN (di»eir-) Nin-
si-na
This is the only month
which is not to be found
in List B. It corre-
sponds to DUN-DA-
Probably the same as
EZEN i-dingir) NE-
SU.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
295
Column II: Neo-Assyrian
names.
4. &U-KUL-NA =
Du-'-u-zu
BIL-BIL-GAR
r= A-bu
6. KIN (*«i"'') In-
nanna = U-lu-lu
7. DUL-AZAG =
Tts-ri-lu
ENGAR - GA£-
A = A - ra-ah-
sam-na
Column I, List C.
^A{fi\c)-NE-RI{sic)-
MU{s.\c)
Column I, List D.
kU-KUL;
List A
ditto in
Thus the copy gives ! Here apparently the writer or
the copyist misread several signs. sA was not the
firstsign, but that which we transcribehypothetically
by G'U-^SI; the third is GU, not RI—2. mistake
easily made — and the MU is only the beginning of
K0\ ■Rea&GiT^-SI-NE-GU-Kt/.
KI-EL Wngir) jsfin- EZEN ('^'"^"''i . . .
(dingir) Mn- ... is to
be completed to iW»-
[a-zii]. In B we have
for £■/-££ = JsTI-S/G
or /r/A^C?)— the latter
sign being not yet iden-
tified.
EZEN (*«.«''■'•) Nin-
a-zu; ditto in ListB
. . , XI-IT
To be completed to
[Ayki-it — A-ki-ti of
B. The name (which
means ' New Year's
festival,' see H. W. B.
p. 123) shows that this
month must have been
at one time the first of
the year (see also List
D). Later on the v4,4iV«
or New Year's festival
was celebrated in the
month Nisan.
EZEN (<''"«''') . . .
From this month onward
the names do not agree
any more with List A.
KI-EIL] i^'"^''-) Ba-
u
\_EZEN] i'i'"e!r) Ba-u
This month was at the
time of Gudea the first
of the year ; see Statue G,
iii. 5, 6 : ud zag-muezen
i,dingir)Ba-u. As such it
corresponds to the A-
ki-ti of Lists B and C.
This also shows that
already at Gudea's time,
whose caravans so often
visited the Lebanon , the
Canaanites must have
ad opted tlie Babylonian
calendar.
E . . . ^iV(sic)
Has to be completed,
according to Gudea,
Cy\.'B,m.1,ioE-BA-
BA-A-LIL !
Has not to be read with Br. 4351 = EZEN (<'•»£''>■'
BIL {NE)-GI, but according to List B = EZEN-
(dingir) Dun-gi.
296
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
Column II: Neo- Assyrian
names.
9. dAN-6AN-NA
= Ki-si-li-mu
10. AB-BA-UD-DU
= Te-bi-tum
II. A$-A-AN=&a-
ba-tu
12. &E-KIN-KUD
=Ad-da-ru
Column I, List C.
Broken away
Read SU{?yPES (?)-
SA (List B).
Broken away
Read EZEN-MAGQAst
B).
EZE^-MA AN-
Column I, List D.
Broken away
Broken away
E^-GA-ZU
BA (sic)
The MA after EZEN contains the overhanging
vowel; as such it is a later form oi EZEN-NA,
Comp. the later gloss ^Z^Af with the older (time
of Gudea) ALAN-NA, and see Hommel, Z. K. i.
p. 173. In AN-BA the BA was misread for NA.
Read EZE^ AN-NA (List B).
EZEN-ME-DI{%\c)-
GAL
The DI was again mis-
read for KI. This is
evident from Lists B
and D.
ME -E - Kl - {ga)-
GAL-{al)
Here the KI was read
correctly. The sign
GAL, written here
SAL, has two phonetic
complements : {go) and
(a/). For a similar
case, see Strassen,
Cyrus, 277, 19 : i-KAR-
ir=ittir.
The above-given lists show clearly that the month EZEN ME-
K1-GXl was the last (twelfth), EZEN'-'''"^''-) Dun-gi the eighth,
and ^E-KIN-KUD the first month ; hence we cannot take SE-
KIN-KUD as our basis in trying to reconcile both lists ', but must
begin with EZEN ^dingir) Dun-gi. If this be true we might make
the following equation : —
> For if SE-KIN-KUD ai A were the first, then EZEN (dinsirY Dun-gi
would be the ninth jnontU, while in B it is the eighth I
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 297
SE-KIN-KVD = ^E-IL'LA = Nisan = first month.
A-KI-TI= EZEN('i'<'si'-') Dumu-zi= Tiirttu = seventh month.
EZEN'^^'*s{<') Dun-gi= EZEN '^'^i^sir) Dun-gi = Arah-samna =
eighth month.
EZEN ME-KI-GAL = SE-KIN-KUD = Addaru = twelfth
month..
That this is the only possible way of reconciling A and B —
notwithstanding the fact that ^E-KIN-KUD of B = ^E-IL-LA
of A, and SE-KIN-KUD of A = EZEN ME-KI-gXl of B—
is also proved by the Canaanitish names.
Above we saw that 3'3N, although originally the seventh, became
in later times=)p*3 or first month. But ^'^X corresponds, as regards
its meaning, to SE-IL-LA ; hence also ^E-IELA must have
been in the oldest times the seventh, and later on the first month
of the year, GAN-MAS, it was said, corresponds to % which latter
again became later on the second = "•*>?; hence also GAN-MA&
must have been originally the eighth, and later on became the
second month.
The different position of the ' harvest-month ' {&E-KIN-KUD)
in Lists A and B is probably due to local circumstances. The year,
as we know, began with the twenty-first of March. The harvest
of B then would fall in March-April, and that of A in February-
March — consequently earlier. It may therefore be quite possible
that List A was in use further south, while A was employed further
north.
The result then is :
I. The year originally began with A-ki-ii ■= Ezen ('^''^^''''i Dumu-
zi = Ezen '.dingir) Ba-u = Q^iT\H = ^K'ljl.
This is proved by —
(a) The name A-kt-ti itself, which means 'New Year's
festival.'
(b) By the fact that at the time of Gudea this seventh month
298 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
was called EZEN (*V<'-) Ba-u, which again was the ZA G-MU,
'the New Year,' Gudea G, iii. 5, 6.
{c) The Canaanitish reckoning, according to which the month
D'JnK was the first. It is highly probable that the word [riN (sing,
of Q''Jns) contains or is a corruption of EZEN, isin, isin, i. e. the
festival kut i^oxrjv, the ' New Year's festival ' — in which case we
would have the same phonetic law as in siiru, "Til^jjy, IjoI'.
(d) The habit of the modern Jews, who still make 'IfJ? their
New Year's month.
2. At some time after Gudea the New Year was changed from
A-ki-ii, &c., to &E-K1N-KUD = ^E-IL-LA ; hence A-ki-ti, &c.,
had to become the seventh = time of Ur IV.
3. At a still later time (Hammurabi dynasty?) the SE-KJN-
KUD = SE-IL-LA was made the last. This seems to be
indicated —
(a) -by V. R. 43, List D: Z (= GAN-MA&?); \GUD-
N^E-SAR-SAR; EZEN C*"^''') Nin-si-na (= EZEN ^dingir)
NE-SIJ); SU-KUL.
(V) by BAR-AZA G-KU of List B, which may be the same as
BAR-AZAG-GAR = Nisannu of later times.
While these changes took place it happened that new months
were introduced, as e.g. the EZEN (*».«''>') Bun-gi— time of
Ur IV. (Comp. in our calendar July and August). Others lost
their original place, as for instance SE-KIN-KUD and SU-KUL.
(So also with our calendar, September, October, &c.) The history
of this latter month is especially interesting. In List A it is the fifth ;
in List D, on the other hand, the fourth. In the Assyrian period,
or possibly before, it was even thrown together with the eighth
month : EZEN (*»*''>■) Dumu-zi ( = Dum-zi = Du'uzt = Dazt =
TOFI). Thus it happened that the month of 'sowing' {SU-KUL)
became the ' child of life ' or ' true child ' {Du'uzu, WJ?).
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
299
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
E. A. H. 134. Comp. V. R. 43.
Obverse.
^^^^^r^^'
W^m^SW4^
WW^~^^^^'
WWWW^^
^<^0^wnm''
t^^
>-<^
12
13
14
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
Reverse
^^^
>fe^ ^<
^4^^<^w??H' ■^'
^g~^^
^^g;^^^^
M^E2Z3
'^WMM^W^
W^^MhW^(
www^^^E^-^-
I. I. Itu^E-KlN-KUD.
II. 2. Itu BAR-AZAG-KU
3. pa-test Gir-sii-^'.
I. The month SE-KIN-KVD corresponds, according to v. R. 43, to Nisannu.
After this month we should expect the Itu DIR SE-KIN-KUD, which,
however, is left out. Comp. also above, List A, Nos. is, 13, and Delitzsch,
A.L=. p. 93.
II. The Itu BAR-AZAG-Ktr {= bAr-AZAG-GAR?) corresponds to
the A-a-ru or the Itu {EZEN) GAN-MAS. During both of these months
the patesi of Girsu was the officiating priest, probably in the temple of B81
at Nippur, for it cannot be denied that B^l even at this time exercised the
chief influence. Comp. e. g. O. B. I. jo and 31, and the expression SAG-US
E W'Hgir) En-lil-ka. '
300
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
III.
IV.
V. 8
Ilu DUN-DA-Kil
pa-te-si Gis-BAN-^'.
Itu GU-SI'NJE-dU-Klf
pa-te-si KA-DINGIR-l'K
Itu KI-KIN {P SIG) (*'«■'■'•) NIN-A-ZU
pa-te-si MARAD-DA-^K
III. Itu DUN-DA-Kt} so clearly here. In E. A. H. 97 we find a month
called Itu URU [SES, Br. d/^it^yDA-KO, which tablet is dated: Mu
a-du-III-katn-ru Si-mu-ru-um-M ba-gul, hence evidently it belongs to this
period. Are these two months identical! If so, the sign DUN^SUL) must
have also the value URV-i^^ES). This would correspond to Itu
EZEN GVD-DU-NE-SAR'SAR. The patesi of Cii-ub-ki officiated.
For the situation of Gis-ui-^^, see under Eannatum and Entemena, p. no, and
tmder ' Uncertain Dates,' note 3. The name Of one patesi of Gis-u^-H is
known to us ; he ruled at the time of Dungi III. ; see Scheil, Rec. Trav. xix.
p. 63 : Ud-ba UrMi'^i-') NE-SU {sic, not KU) pa-te-si Gis-u^M-kam mu
An-sa-an-i' ba-gul (= Dungi III. dates, Nos. 37 and 38). In C. T. 96-6-12,
3 (= Scheil, R. T. xxi. 125), a tablet of a certain {Ga)lu-idmeir-) Utu (= AmH-
Samdi), patesi of Cii-u^-^l, is published, which in all probability belongs
also to this period. It reads !
(Dingir) Mn-liar-sag
am dingir-ri-ne-ra
(fiayu-idingir-) Utu
pa-te-si
Gi's-u^-ki-ge
nam-ti-la-ni-tiu
dingir-gi dingir ki-ag-na
For Ninharsag,
the mother of the gods,
Am61-Shamash,
the patesi
of Gishuh,
for his life,
viz. for the queen (Br. 10073, comp.
Jensen, Kosmologie, p. 207), his be-
loved goddess,
a temple he has built.
Its foundations (may she) make good,
its temen (may she) establish,
the priesthood in its midst
(may she) direct.
It may be a ligature of GO' + SI;
comp. E. C. 37. It corresponds to Itu EZEN\<i"'eir) NE-Sti scoA to DA'zu.
The patesi of KA-DINGIR-ki officiates. KA-DINGIR-ki apparently is
the Semitic writing for bAB-ILI-K = Babylon. Comp. also R. A. iv. No. iii.
pi. v. 13, env. 6.
V. KIKINiJSIG) {sic), as testified to by E. A. H. 109 and by E. C. 463 ;
it stands here in the same relation to the following as EZEN (1. 10) does.
e mu-na-ru
Us-bi mu-dug
temen-bi mu-si
sib-bi iag-bi-ct
si-im-ma-ni-di
IV. The sign after Itu is uncertain
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 301
VI. 10. Itu EZEN^<'i«si^) NIN-A-ZU.
VII. II. Itu A-KI-TI
12. fa-ie-si Gt'r-su-^K
VIII. 13. Itu EZEN-i'ii''sir) DUN-GI
14. pa-k-si ezen '^ingir') Bun-gi
PA {?) Mu-ic-lu{?) da-LUM LUG.
IX. 15. Ilu&U{?)-{P)E&-&A
16. pa-ie-st UD-NUN-'"'.
In V. R. 43 we have for KI-SIG= KI-EL. Or should we read here KI-KIN,
and comp. Itu KIN idingir) Innan-na= Ululu, Delitzsch, A. L'., p. 92, 4,1. 6 ?
KI-SIGIJ KIN) corresponds to the Itu SU-KUL, which later on became the
fourth month, but here it is the Wa. = A-bu. For the pronunciation MARAD-
DA-ki, see Br. 9079. Marad, according to Smith = 'A^op5oKaio(Ptol. v. 20, 3),
south of Borsippa. Comp. also NiMRoD with Nu-MaRaD (= the man from
Marad) ; see Delitzsch, Pftrad. p. 220, and iv. R^. 36, No. i, col. ii. 22.
VI. Itu EZEN-(dingir> NIN-A-ZU = itu ZIB-Kt/ = U-lu-lu = KIN
{dingir) Innanna.
VII. With A-KI-TI begins the second half During this and the preceding
month the patesi of Girsu again officiates. A-ki-ti = DUL-AZAG= Tii-ri-tu
D^SriKn rrv = ezen (dingtr) Dumu-zi = EZEN'.dmgir) Ba-u (of Gudea).
VIII. This month we find again in List A, and is, according to v. R. 43, =
AraJi-'iamna.
The Dun-gi here mentioned is Dungi III. ; see further below.
The officiating priest was the pa-te-si EZEN(dingir) Dun-gi. Here then we
have a new class of patesis, e.g. one of a festival. It is evident that patesi can
mean in this connection only as much as ' Vorsteher,' or ' arranger,' an officer
specially appointed for this occasion. Line 14 b is much mutilated by a petri-
fied mass, only the signs MU- (I and da-L UM L UG are clear. The first sign
may be PA or BA or AS; the fourth either SU or KU ox LU. The read-
ing PA MU- Cl-L U seems to be the most probable. PA = officer ; MU- U-L U—
the name of the officer ( = patesi). Da-L UM = da-num (see notes to O. B. I.
1). This shows that the whole tablet ought to be read in an Assyrian way.
LUG=sukallu, Br. 6170, H. W. B. 498, and O. B. I. part ii. p. 41, note 6.
Comp. also C. T. 12231, ii. 20: GIR Ezen (dingir) DUn-gi {ga)lu-im ( = 1antl,
Br. 4821).
IX. The sign after Itu may be either SU, KU, or Zm, or even S/G. The
next sign is the number ' 3.'
Itu SU?-{P)ES-SA = Itu EZENkdingir) BA-U of List A = Ki-si-li-mu.
For UD-NUN-ki, comp. iv. R^ 36, i, obv. 5, 6, mentioned between Ur
and Isin.
302 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
X. 17. Itu EZEN-MAG
18. PA-AL Uru-um-'^K
XI. 19. ItuEZEN-AN-NA
2 o. pa-te-si SU-KUR-R U-^'.
XII. 21. Itu EZEN ME-KI-GAL{IK)
2 2 . pa-te-si KA -SA L-L U->''.
X. The month of the 'great festival' = /;?« MU-SU-GAB {?,x[zan) = Itu
MU-^ U- UL (List A) = AB-BA- UD-D U = Te-bi-tum. The fa-at ( = Assyr.
sairii) of Ur officiated.
XI. ' Festival of Ana' =/lu {EZEN) AMAI?-A-(A)-SI = Sa-ba-tu. Ac-
cording to Br. 223 the C'Vk) SU-KUR is = Marduk, ii. R. 54, 49^. In iii. R.
68, 8 c, the &«) SU-KUR-R UH mentioned. This month is also on E. A. H. 87.
XII. This month, written in List D ME-E-KI-{ga)-GAL{SAL)-{al), is
according to v. R. 43 = SE-KIN-KUD or Ad-da-yu, i.e. the twelfth month.
For KA-SAL-LU, comp. Br. 670 and 675, and Dungi III. dates, No. 13 ;
iv. R. 36, No. I, obv. ii. 23; and above, pp. 158, 163, 190, 256.
Traces of a third nomenclature, which is the beginning of the
later or Assyrian already in use at the time of Hammurabi, give us
the following months : —
Itu A&-A, E. A. H. 90. This tablet is dated : Mu en Uru-ki-
Kar-zi-da ba-tug, belongs therefore to this period (comp. Dates of
Bur-Sin, No. 11). This month clearly corresponds to the Assyr.
Sabatu (eleventh month).
Itu GI&-ENGAR-GAB-A is to be found on E. A. H. 106,
with the date Mu-us-sa Lu-lw-bu-um-^' ba-^ul (Uncertain Dates,
No. 2). Apparently this writing is only the fuller form for the
ENGAR-GAB-A = A-ra-ah-iam-na (eighth month), Delitzsch,
A. L'. p. 92.
Itu INNANNA on E. A. H. 108 {tnu en nam-? {<l'«sir) Dun-gi-
ra-ge ba-DU ba-tug ; see Uncertain Dates, No. 4). This probably
is only an abbreviation for Itu [EZEN ox KIN ^'^'"sr^'')'] INNAN-
NA ; comp. also above (arrangement A) sub No. 4 : Itu EZEN
i^ingir) NE-SU and Itu ('''«p'>') NE-St. The month Ululu is
called the itu KIN (*«^''-) INN AN (Br. 'i,oe^i)-NA. The itu
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 303
Tnnanna then is = Hu Wngif) Innanna = Itu KIN C'''"^''') Innan-
NA = Ululu = the sixth month.
For liu URU-DA-Ktl, comp. above, note III.
We see then that at the time of Ur IV. there were in use three
distinct nomenclatures for the months. The year consisted of
twelve months ; sometimes a thirteenth month, called DIR ^E-
KIN-KVD (or arah Bahir arM, time of Sargon I.), was added,
and according to C. T. 18358 it might happen that in a period of
five years two such intercalary months could be put in.
This is important in more than one respect — important not only
for the question of how many days the month consisted, but also
for that of the intercalary months themselves.
From iii. R. 52, 37 b, XllarhiP'- la Utti i S"" VI Uk {= 360)
UrneP'- id mi-na'dt ZA G-MUG ina M . . ., we know that the year
consisted of 360 days, or twelve months of thirty days. We know
further that the names of three intercalary months are preserved :
the second Ni'san, EM (i^i^Nl), and Addar (ilKl)\ and that the
month Abu was that of dry heat, while Sabatuyi2& that of snow and
cold i^algu kus^u '"'"'i AS dannat kussi ul ddur, iii. R. 15, i. 14).
This latter passage — occurring very often in Assyrian inscriptions —
proves that the people at that time must have reckoned according
to sun-years. If therefore the year consisted of 3 60 days, and
they notwithstanding reckoned according to sun-years, it was
necessary for them to intercalate one month every six years, or else
within thirty-six years the Sabdtu would have become the month
of dry heat, and Abu that of snow and cold. Thus the existence
of one intercalary month might be explained. But there were
three such months.
From C. T. 18358, see above sub Dates of Dungi III, p. 252,
we learn that it could happen that in a period of five years two
such intercalary months were sometimes put in. On the supposi-
tion that the year consisted of 360 days, such a thing could happen
only every 120 years. With us every four years a twenty-ninth
of February is intercalated. If this were not done, then in
' See among other places also iii. R. 56, No. 5.
304 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
30 X 4 years we should be back one month in our time. If this
explanation be admissible, then we have to suppose that within
those five years enumerated by C. T. 18358 one such one hundred
and twentieth year was to be found. In this way we possibly
could account for the existence of two intercalary months, but
never for that of three ^ This shows that at some time the
Babylonians or Assyrians were in need of three intercalary months.
How then can we explain the existence of three intercalary
months ?
Lists A and B again give us the key. Above it was argued that
the year originally began with Akiti = Esen (<=''«^''') Dumu-zi =
Tt^ritu = D'jriN — Ezen idingir) Bdu (List D, time of Gudea).
If this be true then the month ^E-KIN-KUD (List B) = &E-IL-
LA (List A) must have been the seventh. Unfortunately no
tablet has come down to us so far which shows that they had at
that time e. g. a DIR ^E-KIN-KUD, although we know that on
one of the tablets belonging to Sargon I.'s period an arah Bahir
arM(^—'A. second AddarT) is mentioned. We saw also that at
some time after Gudea the beginning of the year must have been
changed from Ikiti to ^E-KIN-KUD = &E-IL-LA, which
arrangement we find at the time of Ur IV. In R. A. iv. iii.
pi. xxix. No. 78 — a tablet reckoning according to List B —
a DIR &E-KIN-KVD is mentioned, see env. ii. 9 ff. : NIN-
^ID-AG, bal UrMingif) KAL pa-te-si Gir-su-'^, itu ^E-KIN-
KUD-ta, itu DIR &E-KIN-KUD-ku, itu 2^'». ^E-KIN-KUD
being in List B the first month = Nisan, we should have here
a second Nisan •-. The DIR ^E-KIN-KUD to be found among
other places also in R. A. iv. iii. pi. xxviii. No. 77, env., i. i —
' According to the above-given supposition, the one hundred and twentieth
year must have had two intercalary months : one that was put in every six years,
and the other that of every one hundred and twenty years. But one year with
two intercalary months is improbable — yes, impossible. Hence they could not
have invented a second Elul alongside of a second Addar.
' And because a second Nisan, we must postulate also a second Tiiritu.
This would follow from the analogy of the second Elul,
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 305
a tablet reckoning according to List A — is not the second Nisart,
but the second Addar (TlNl), because in List A ^E-KIN-KUD is
the twelfth month.
But WHY was there also a second Elul (P17S1) ?
C. T. 18358 again gives us the answer ! It reckons according to
List A, and states expressly that among sixty-two months, or five
years, two intercalary months are to be found (z'/a 62 *'"" itu-dir
2-a-an lag-ba-ni-ght), hence among every thirty-one months, or
2\ years, one intercalary month, which must have been the second
Elul. True it is that I have not yet seen mentioned, on any of the
tablets belonging to this period, a second Elul (which would have
been called according to List A DIR ZIB-Ku, or possibly also
ZIB-KII 2 £■"" '.kamy^^ but that does not prove that it did not exist
at all'. The fact however that such a second Elul is known proves
enough — at least, so much that it was felt necessary to intercalate
a month in the middle of the year. It was no doubt intended to
have a year of 360 days, as is apparent from iii, R. 52, 37^, but
in fact it must have had less, so that every five years two months
could be intercalated. On this supposition we would get th§
following equation : 5 x 360 = 5 x 360 -^ 60 for five years, and for
5x360 5 X 360 — 60 . I, J 1 o
one year = ~ — - — = , 1. e. the year had only 348
5 5 , "
days ; hence every two and a half years one month had to be added :
2i X 360 = 2^ X 348 + 30.
Another fact, however, has to be taken into consideration.
Such names as ^E-KIN-KU£> ^' hznest,' &E-IL-LA =' grain
grown,' GAN-MA& = ' field in blossom,' ^U-KUL = ' sowing,'
show clearly enough that the people at this time (Ur IV.) must
have had a sun-year, or else every thirty-six years the harvest
month, e.g., would be exactly six months too early; hence we
inust suppose that still a third month had to be intercalated every
six years. In the following I give a survey of thirty years ; the
' At the time of ^ammurabi such a second Elul (?1?Nl)) written itu KIN
(dingir) Innanna 2 kam, was in existence ; see King, Letters of Hammurabi,
No. 14. (Personal communication of Prof. Hommel.)
X
3o6 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
large numbers show the years when thirty days were added at an
interval of thirty months, while the underlined numbers give those
years when one month was intercalated in order to keep up with
the sun: i, 2,-3, 4, 5 | •£ , 7, 8, 9, 10 | 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 | 16,
r7, 18\ 119, .20 I -^i, 2.2, 23, 24, 25 I 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 |.
'{With 31 fF. the same arrangement begins over again.)
This survey shows that if the people of Ur IV. reckoned accord^
•ing to sun-years, the five years of C. T. 18358 could only have
fallen within the period of Nos. 7-1 1 (or 37-4-1, &c.) of the above-
given scheme. If, on the other hand, they did not reckon according
to sun-years, those 'five years might embrace any period of that
■length.
Further, if it be true that the year had only 348 days instead of
360, it might be natural to suppose that each month had 29 days.
But against this is E. A. H. 152 : Uu -EZEN ^'^^'"^''''^ Dumu-zi ud
^Q kam . and Arnold, Ancient Babylonian Temple Records, No. 2 :
ilu EZEN ^'^•"^i'') Ba-u ud 30 '""", showing that there must have
existed some months of 30 days. Hence we may say, if it be
admitted that the year had 348 days, the months must have had
30 and 28 days alternately. The month ZIB-KU, with 28 days,
is.mentioned in C. T. 13889, and GUD-DU-NE-SAR is mentioned
with 29 in C. ■13892. According to List A, the EZEN (*'»i''''')
J)umu-zi is the seventh, and EZEN ('^'ȣ>>') Ba-u the ninth month ;
hence we-may say that at the time of Ur IV. all months with uneven
numbers had 30, while the others had only 28 days^. This seems
to us the most reasonable explanation. The result then is :
A year consisted of 348 days, and the months had alternately
'■ This year as well as No. 30 ought to have two intercalary months ! In all
probability this -was avoided, and one monlh was added to the following year,
i, e. nineteenth or thirty-first year.
'^ At the time- of ■'Hammurabi this arrangement has been changed — it being
probably due to the fact that the year did not begin with ^E-KIN-KUD =
^E-IL-LA, but with BAR-AZAG-KV = GAN-MA§, see above— for we
find a 30th Arabiamna, A. B. P. R. No. 66; a 30th Nisan, ibid. No. 107;
a 29th Tiirltu, ibid. No. 1 19 ; a 30th .^(Zifar, King, Letters of ^ammurabi,
No. 40, 6, 13,
Assyrian.
~\ 1
'
■
I bAr-azag-gar^
I Ni-sa-an-nu^ {>; . D'aN*)
Days.
30
2 GUD-SI-DI
2 ^-«-r» (8. 1p
28
3 SEG-GA
3 Si-ma-nu
30
•
4 ^U-KUL-NA
4 Du'-u-zu
28
■
5 BIL-BIL-GAR
5 ^-i»
30
6 KIN<<dingir) Innanna
6 «/./«-/»
38
•
7 DUL-AZAG
7 7Vif-«V« (I. CJON)
30
A^
8 ENGAR-GAB-A
8 A-ra-ab-iam-na (2. ?13)
28
■
9 GAN-6AN-NA
9 Ki-si-li-mu
30
lo AB-BA-UD-DU
10 Te-bi-iitm
s8
II AS-A-AN
II Sa-ba-tu
30
12 ^E-KIN-KUD
12 Ad-da-ru
38
13 Z»/^ SE-KIN-KUD
13 ffr-^M ma^-ru sa Ad-da-ru
30
ording to Ur IV. B, on the basis of E. A. H. 134 and v. R. 43.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 307
30 and 28 days. The year, although intended to be a sun-year,
was a combination of a sun- and a moon-year. Every two and
a half years an intercalary month was put in : the second JElul
(i'li'Nl) and the second Addar {puvS).
For the sake of completeness I may be permitted to mention
a third possibility of the mode of reckoning at this time. From
the Hebrew calendar we know that the months had alternately
30 and 29 days ; the year therefore consisted of 354 days. Accord-
ing to this, every five and every six years an intercalary month
had to be put in — the former to make it harmonize with iii. R,
52, 37b (equation : 5 x 360 = 5x354 + 30), the latter to make the
year agree with the course of the sun or seasons. The following
scheme shows the years when one month was intercalated ; the
large numbers indicate that of every five years, and the under-
lined that of every six years: i, 2, 3, 4, 5 ( 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 | 11,
12, 13, 14, 15 I 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 I 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 1 26,
27, 28, 29, 30 ' |. According to this scheme the five years of C. T.
18358 could fall into any period of that length — no doubt a great
advantage over the supposition that the year consisted of .348
days only. However, if this latter were true, there would, have
been no need whatever to have a second Elul, which, as we saw,
exists already at the time of Hammurabi. If therefore it be true
that a second £lul could and had to be put in some time — which
cannot be denied — we are forced to the conclusion that the year
originally must have had only 348 days. Later on it may have
been changed. To show when and why this old arrangement was
abolished is the task of future investigation.
In conclusion, I have prepared a comparative table of the names
of the months during this period (see opposite).
The sign of • god ' before certain proper names.
The attention of the reader has already been drawn to the
remarkable fact that up to the time of Sargon I. the kings of Early
1 See note i, p. 3o<5.
X 2
3o8 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
Babylonia never prefixed to their names the sign of god
(' dingir '). From that time on, till the fourth dynasty of Ur, and
even later, the kings were considered, or better considered them-
selves, as emanations of the deity, i. e. as ' gods.'
True it is that the kings before the time of Sargon I. acknow-
ledged or emphasized their belief that the wisdom and power which
they displayed were given them by the different gods.
Eannatum expressly says that ' he was nourished with the milk
of life by Ninharsag, was endowed with power by Nirgirsu, that
his intelligence was given him by Enki ' (Galet A, i. and ii.), but
he does not yet go so far as to say that he is the son of a specified
god, or still further ' god * himself \ This bold idea was first pro-
pounded by Lugalzaggisi, who claims to be ' a son begotten by
Nidaba, nourished with the milk of life by Ninharsag, a slave
brought up by Ninagidgadu' (O. B. I. 87, i. 26 ff.). Lugal-
zaggisi, although clearly maintaining that he was of divine origin,
a 0\n7X p, refrains however from styling himself directly ' %°^
Lugalzaggisi.'
The first who ventured to claim the divine appellation was
Sargon I. (O. B. L 2, i ^). His son Naram-Sin goes even a step
further. Not only does he invariably term himself ' eo<J Naram-Sin '
(ilu Na-ra-am-(ilu) Sin), but even ' god of Agade ' {ilu Agade-^') ;
nay, even en men anna, i. e. in Assyr. either = bel ag^ iamdmi, ' lord
of the heavenly disk,' or = de"! age' s&i, ' lord of the exalted disk.'
This is significant. Above we have seen that some of the Semites
after they had invaded Babylonia remained in their new home;
others, leaving it again, settled down in the north. Among those
Semites that remained in Babylonia must be reckoned Eannatum.
To those that settled down in the north belong Lugalzaggisi and
' That the expression (dingir) En-temen- ... has not to be referred to
Entemena, who thus would call himself here ' god,' but that it is in apposition
to (dingir) Dun-gur, who sometimes is also called (dingir) Dun-gur-an, see
above, p. 118, note i to O. B. I. 115, and also p. 92, note 18.
^ Only here. In all the other inscriptions of this king the sign for god
is not written before his name.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 309
Sai-gon I. Hence we see that to. the Semites of the north ^ was
restricted this particular belief, that the king was an emanation of
the deity. But here again we should distinguish between those
Semites situated nearest to the Sumerians (i. e. Lugalzaggisi) and
those that were more remote (i. e. Sargon I.). If we compare the
peculiar belief of these two latter kinds of Semites with that of those
who actually lived among the Sumerians (i. e. Eannatum) we shall
find the reason for this variety of phraseology. Originally all the
Semites believed that their head, the king, was a son of god ; nay,
even a god himself. This belief was later on — when the Semites
had invaded Babylonia and had come into contact with the old
Sumerians — to some extent modified. Those Semites that were
in daily intercourse with the Sumerians lost in course of time this
faith, being content with stating that they were endowed with
divine power. Those nearest to the Sumerians (Gishuh : Lugal-
zaggisi) modified it so far that they looked upon their king as
' a son of god,' but did not directly claim for him the divine title.
The Semites who lived furthest away from the Sumerians kept
their original faith undefiled. Their king was their god. It is
however remarkable that the name of Sargon I. is written only
once '''* Sar-ga-ni-'iar-dli, and that of Naram-Sin always ilu
Naram-'^'' Sin. Why? It has been stated above (p. 166) that
Thureau-Dangin (Rec. Trav. xix. p. 187) holds 'que Shargani et
surlout Naram-Sin aient subi, en ce qui touche la conception du
caractere royal, Ttnfluence plus ou mains lointaine des ide'es e'gyp-
liennes.' This hypothesis he bases upon the fact ' que Sargon-
I'Ancien a /lendu son empire jusquen Syro-Palestine,' and had thus
come into contact with Egyptian ideas.
We know however that Lugalzaggisi had also extended his domain
as far as Syria-Palestine; comp. e. g. in O. B. I. 87, ii. 4 ff., the
phrase, 'from the lower sea of the Tigris and the Euphrates to
' They did not assimilate theinselves to such a degree to the old
.Sumerians as did those of their kinsmen who remained among the old inhabi-
tants of ancient Babylonia.
3IO EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
the upper sea,' and his statement that he made conquests ' from the
rising of the sun even to the going down of the same.' It would there-
fore be natural to suppose that he too would have come into
contact with Egyptian ideas. He would have had no reason for
refusing the title of god, seeing that he already claimed to be ' a
son begotten by Nidaba.' Hence il seems that the reason why
Sargon I. and Naram-Sin should call themselves ' god ' must be
sought elsewhere. True it is that the kingdom of Agade was the
most remote from Sumerian influence, consequently it also kept
the old faith purest. But this reason alone would not account
suflSciently for the facts. What then was the chief cause which should
induce Sargon I, to call himself ' god ' ? We have seen that
Sargon I., and especially his son Naram-Sin, not only conquered
the west but also Arabia (see p. 162). But Arabia was the original
home of the Semites. Here among the Semites of the Arabian
Desert the old Semitic faith was preserved in all its purity.
Sargon I., himself being a Semite, was only too glad to ' renew ' the
old faith of the Semites — which to some extent was still lingering
among his people — especially because it contributed so much to
his own honour. He is followed in doing this by his son Naram-
Sin, who even goes a step further, not only calling himself
' eod Naram-Sin,' but also ' god of Agade ' ; nay, even ' lord of the
heavenly disk.' Thus we also understand why. Lugalzaggisi did
not call himself ' god.' Simply because he was only a lugal-
kalamma, and not a sar kibrat arb'a'im., not having subjugated Arabia
and thus not having come into contact with the old Semitic faith '.
The conception of the king as a ' son of god ' is found also
among the later patesis of Shirpurla. No doubt this was a result
of the reign of Sargon I. and Naram-Sin over the whole of
Babylonia,
Ur-Ba'u calls himself ' a son begotten by Ninagal ' (i. e. Ea,
see E. A, H. 112, 7, 8); Gudea is begotten by Gatumdug (Statue
' This also explains why the kings of Kish do not call themselves ' god ' —
simply because they had not come into contact with the old Semites of the
Arabian Desert.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 311
B, ii. 1 6). This latter patesi even goes beyond all his predecessors.
He makes a statue of himself, places it in the temple of Ningirsu,
and orders that i ka of fermented drink (g'as), i ka of food (g'ar),
^ ka of fine flour (zid-dub-duV), \ ka of crushed barley {nin-^ur-
ra al-ati) (Statue B, i. 8-11) should be offeree^ yearly (?) to it.
This action of Gudea is somewhat remarkable, seeing that he
does not call himself god ^ ; nor do any of the later patesis of
Shirpurla ascribe to themselves this arrogant title. The reason for
this probably is that the title ' god ' could only be ascribed to
kings ; hence, being a patesi, he could not call himself ' god.' For
this deficiency he made up by at least trying to gefe the worship
of a god.
During the time of the second dynasty of ¥r " the title ' god '
disappears. It reappears, however, with the kings of Isin in South
Babylonia. We can explain this as follows :— Under Ur-Gur and
Dungi I.. the Semitic and the Sumerian populations were joined under
one sceptre in the nam-lugal Kengi-^-Urdu, i.e. in the kingship
of Shumer and Akkad. Semites had free intercourse with the
Sumerians. They could go to and fro, settle down wherever they
pleased. Those who settled down in Isin were able to seize in
course of time the power and kingship of Babylonia. They
naturally brought all their ideas about king and kingship with them.
Their ancestors had been living in the north of Babylonia, where
the king was ' god.' Hence those Semites who eventually became
kings of Isin ascribed to themselves the title of god. Thus, then,
the title ' god,' which had its original home in Arabia, and with the
^ The writing dingir Cu-de-a in Statue C is not an exception. The dingir
there refers back to (drngir) Nin-gii-zid-da, and has to be connected with kam
in 1. 6. See the translation above, p. 199.
' The name of Dungi I. occurs sometimes written (dingir) Dungi ;
comp. i. R. 2, ii. i ; K. B. iii '. p. 80, Nos. i and 4. Winckler, 1. c. note 3,
makes the following remark to this AN: ' Dieses AN ( = dingir) scheint
nicht das vor den Namen sfdterer Konige gesetzte Gottesdeterminativ zu sein,
welches auch vor dent Namen Ur-Gur s nicht steht, sondern sich nur auf das
DUN zu beziehen. AN-DUNist aber nach v. R. 44, 20 = Bdu, der Name
DUN-GI also semitisch, wohl als BcCu-uktn oder ahnlich zu deuien.'
312 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
use of which the subjugation of that country may have been con-
nected originally, lost at length its signification and became a mere
' ornamental ' ' appendage to the names of these kings.
■Enannatum, the son of Ishme-Dagan, is not king, consequently
also not styled ' god ^ '.
Too little so far is known about the rulers of the third dynasty of
Ur to justify us in making any conclusions, but the representatives of
the fourth dynasty of Ur all ' call themselves ' god ' : ¥'V'>-) Bun-gi*
(E. A. H. 6r) ; (*«r'>-) £ur-('^'"r''') Sin ' ; ('''■»#''') Gimil-^'''"^''''' Sin ;
(dingir) j.„g.(dingir) Sin — the first ' dingir ' being only there to deify
the persons.
Scheil, in Rec. Trav. xviii. 64 ff., published a number of tablets — .
all written during the time of the fourth dynasty of Ur — which give
us the ' appointed portions ' for the following gods and persons : for
(dingir) Dun-pa-ud-du, for (d'»ei*-) Dun-gi, for (<^'»f''-) Nin-gi^-zid-da,
for C*«r'>-) Gu-de-a pa-te-si, for Gudea ike patesi, and for Ur-^'''"^''')
KAL the patesi (comp. also Thureau-Dangin, R. A. iii. p. 135 —
a tablet which mentions the same names).
' That the name or sign ' god ' is a mere ornament is evident from the
names themselves ; comp. (dingir) UrX'^'i) Ninib ; (dingir) U-miMn) Dagan,
Sic, where the first dingir is apparently meaningless.
* The kings of Erech, SingSshid and Singamil, have also the sign of ' god '
before their names, but here it is clearly the determinative before 'Sin.'
* Excepting Ur-Ba'u II. The reason for this undoubtedly is that in the
places where he is mentioned (Rec. Trav. xix. 49) he appears not yet as
'king,' consequently also not as ' god.'
* The sign of 'god,' however, is left out in the Semitic-Babylonian
inscription of Dungi III. published by Winckler, A. B. K. No. 37, and
translated by the same in K. B. iii '. p. 83. Above it has already been stated
that this tablet belongs not to Dungi I., but to Dungi III., on account of the
' title.' The reason why the sign of ' god ' is left out here is that the ' scribe
who made this copy forgot to put it there,' for there can be no doubt that
that tablet is simply a copy of an older one. This is expressly stated on
another tablet (belonging to Dungi I.), copied also from an older one found
in the temple at Kutha : M Hi (abnii) na-ru-a labiri sa E-Sid-lam ki-rib
A'utd. Dup-pu U Bil-uballi-it dup-sar (Winckler, A. B. K., No. 35).
'" It is also left out on a tablet dated from Lulubi, E. A. H. 27. See for
the reason of this note i to dates of Bnr-Sin, p. 266.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 313
Seheil, I.e.', thinks, because the patesi Gudea is mentioned on
those tablets, that this Gudea is the old patesi of Shirpuria who
had erected his statue in the temple of Ningirsu, and had ordered
that certain sacrifices should be brought to this statue. The
{dingir) Dun-gi, then, he takes to be Dungi I., king of Ur (second
dynasty), he being a contemporary of Gudea (Winckler, U. A. G.
157, 9). He is partly right and partly wrong. The very fact that
Gudea, the old patesi of Shirpuria, never called himself directly ' god '
leads us to discriminate between (*»i'«>') Gu-de-a pa-le-si and Gudea
patesi. All Gudea of Shirpuria could do was to erect certain
statues — some of which have come down to us and are preserved in
the Louvre — and order that sacrifices should be brought to these
' statues.' Undoubtedly these statues were still in existence at the
time of Ur IV. The people, seeing the statues in their temples,
came to look upon them in course of time as ' gods,' and thus it
happened that we have here a (*«/■''') Gu-de-a pa-ie-si. But this^
does not necessarily imply that the old Gudea was still living.
Besides this, we saw above that Gudea, having instituted certain
specific sacrifices in honour of ' his double,' adds : 'A patesi
who should retract this, who should hinder the command of
Ningirsu, his sacrifices may be retracted from the house of Ningirsu
and his commands may be bound ! ' (B, i. 13-20). A comparison
of the above instituted sacrifices with those actually brought —
mentioned on the tablets above referred to — will show that these
sacrifices did not agree with those commanded by Gudea I. We
can hardly suppose that the people of the fourth dynasty, if they
were contemporaries of the Gudea of Shirpuria, would set at nought
his express command, and in defiance of his curse would offer to
him whatever they pleased.
Hence we have to distinguish between (*«.?'''') Gu-de-a pa-te-si, who
is the old patesi of Shirpuria — dead, to be sure, for a long time, but
still living in the statues he had erected, and which statues were
looked upon in course of time as ' gods^' — and between Gudea
' And R. T. xxi. 26 ff. . Le culte de Gudea.
' Hence it also happened that we find at the time of Ur IV.^ such names as
314 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
patesi, a contemporary of the kings of, Ur IV '., viz. Bur-Sin II. to
Gimil-Sin, see p. 244 ff. Whether this latter was also a patesi of
Girsu-Shirpurla is by no means certain.. This latter Gudea we
call Gudea II.; comp. also Thureau-Dangin, R. A. iii. p. 139, 1. 18.
Furthermore, if this distinction holds, we cannot say very well
that sacrifices were offered to Gudea patesi and Ur-(^^''S'->') Kal
pa-te-si. Sacrifices are only for gods '.
There is further nothing to lead us to suppose that the {dingir)
Dun-gi mentioned in those tablets is Dungi I. . At the time when
Scheil wrote his article, he was not aware of the existence of
a Dungi III., and thus, because Gudea and Dungi were mentioned
together, he, like Lehmann (Zwei Probleme), thought they must be
Dungi I., king of Ur, and Gudea, patesi of Shirpurla (see above,
pp. 34 and 347).
We have already seen, when considering the names of thfi
months, that under Dungi III. (or the fourth dynasty of Ur) the'
eighth month was called Itu EZEN (dingir) DUN-GI— 2. new
name, for it only occurs during this period. Hence it is natural to
suppose that Dungi III. himself had dedicated this month as a
festival in his own honour, in which, under the patesi EZEN (<^'«*''>')
Dun-gi, sacrifices were to be offered to him as god. In addition to
this, the day of the new moon and the fifteenth day of each month
were also ' sacred to him.' Sacrifices offered on these days were
{Ga)lu (dingir) Gu-de-a, R. T. xviii. p.-72 ; also Ainat {GIN)-'4'"S''") Gu-de-a,
ibid.
' The name Gudea is very common at this time ; comp. e.g. C. T. 13231, *.,
two Gudeas mentioned.
' This is clear from the analogy of the case. Thureau-Dangin has published
a similar tablet in R. A. iii. p. 135. Among the parties for whom GAR,
KAS, KU, ZAL were appointed are to be found the GIR-GAL, the slaves
GU-NI-BAR, the slaves of Anshan, the slaves of Shimash, the slaves of
Kimash, the KUR-BI SANGU DU-GAB, the slaves of Marhashi, the {£a)lu
KIN-GI-A {^mdrsipri, Br. 10768), the asses ZI-LUM, Gndea the patesi,
god Dunpauddu, and lastly god Dungi. This tablet shows that the grain, &c.,
were appointed not as sacrifices for Gudea — or else he had to be a (dingir)
Gudea — but simply as a kind of food Qag-gat) or sustenance, as in. the case of
the different slaves.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 315
called AB-AB UD-SAR UD-XV, i.e. ' offerings (?) on the new
moon (and) on the fifteenth day.' This is proved by the subscrip-
tion of the tablets above referred to, in which mention is made
of the following months in this connection ; &U-KUL, EZEN
{dtngir) Dun-gi, kE-lL-LA, GAN-MA&, ZIB-Ktl, MU-&U-UL,
AMAR-A-SI. The incompleteness of the tablets leads us to
suppose that the same was true of the other months.
Thus we see that during this time (Ur IV.) kings were looked
upon as ' gods ' ' ; that a special month was dedicated to them (as
in the case of Dungi III.) ; and that on the new moon (= first day)
and on the fifteenth day of each month special sacrifices were to be
offered to them.
After the death of Dungi III., the eighth month was retained as
' the festival of Dungi ^' The first and fifteenth day of each month,
however, were reserved for the special service in honour of the
individual king that might happen to reign.
It is self-evident that the king was not worshipped in persona,
but — like Gudea of old — he made statues of himself and placed
them in different temples, commanding the people to sacrifice to
' this double.' Clearly the king could not ■ be in all the different
places of his realm, hence the necessity for this expedient. This
is clearly corroborated by a tablet published by Thureau-Dangin in
Rec. Trav. xix. 186, which reads :
4 gir-lam 3 ka gts-ma
statue of Gimil-Sin (in) the temple of Ningirsu
4 gir-lam 3 ka gti-ma
statue of Gimil-Sin (in) the temple of Ba'u
4 gir-lam 3 ka gis-via
1 Nay, even directly called 'god.' See e.g. C. T. 94-10-16, 4, rev. iii. :
a-'iag Kdingir) Bur-^rliHgir) Sin dingir-ni ki-ag, the field of Bur-Sin, his beloved
god. Comp. also such names as {dingir) Dun-gi-%i-kalam-ma, (Ga)lu-(d'«gi^')
Dungi, LugalMi'igi^ Dungi in C. T., and iflmgir) Dungi-bdni, Mir-Dungi,
Dungi-ili in R. T. xviii. p. 72, and especially C. T. part vii. No. 1 2939.
" This follows fiom the fact that even at the time of GimilSin the month
Itu EZEN^'l'^gir) Dun-gi occurs. See C. T, 13882.
3l6 EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY
temple of Gimil-Sin
Offerings (AB-AB) on the new moon, and on the fifteenth day
of the month &U-KUL.
One year after Gimil-Sin had built the wall of the east (called)
' murik Tidnum ' (i. e. which keeps away Tidnum).
It is, however, remarkable that the successors of Dungi III should
retain the eighth m.onth as the EZENi'^i^e''''^ DUN-GI, while they
appointed the fifteenth day of each month to their own worship.
Surely this fact gives to Dungi III. a special significance. He
stood out as the ' hero-god ' during this whole period. Are we not
justified in regarding him as the founder of this new dynasty whose
memory had to be kept sacred ? This, I think, is the only solu-
tion, or else would not his successors have been anxious also
to set apart a special month for their own honour ? But they do
not do it, and because they do not do it they ipso facto testify to
the greatness of this king — the king who founded their dynasty,
and who, during a reign of at least fifty-one years, was able to seize
the kingship of the four corners of the world ^
In course of time, and probably not very long after the reign of
such a ' god-king,' the kings seem to have been worshipped under
the form of a ' star! Scheil recently published a remarkable
tablet (Z. A. xii. p. 265), which states expressly that 2 ka (of grain)
were given to ('i'"^''') £uM^'"£^'^) Sin, the MUZ AMAR-UD, i.e.
to Bur-Sin, who is the star Marduk.
Thus then we see that the kings of this dynasty assumed for them-
selves the title of ' god,' built temples in their honour, placed their
statues in the different sanctuaries, appointed certain offerings in
honour of their ' doubles,' instituted a certain month (the eighth),
and besides this the first and fifteenth day of each month, as times
on which sacrifices were to be offered to them. Certain officers were
appointed to conduct these services : for the eighth month (EZEN
(dinjrir) Dungi), the patesi EZEN {dingiy) Dungi, and for the first
' This also speaks against the theory ofWinckler; that our Dungi-III was the
Same as Dungi son of Ur-Gur.
EARLY BABYLONIAN HISTORY 317
and fifteenth day of each month, the KA-SU-GAB (see Scheil, Rec.
Trav. xviii. 7 1 ff.) — apparently an officer of minor importance, and
as such standing under the supervision of the patesi, whose duty
clearly it was to officiate before ' the statues' (hence KA-SU-GAB
{dingir) Gu-de-a).
From these considerations it follows :
(i) That only kings could call themselves ' god,' and be wor-
shipped as such while still living.
(2) That in course of time the statues of any ruler — be he patesi
or king — were looked upon, because they had been placed in the
temples, as gods, which were to be worshipped and to which
sacrifices were to be offered ^.
' Hence snch names as (dixgir) J^i- (dingir) Ddgan (p. 262, 42) ; (dingir) fii-
(dingir) Ba-u (ibid) ; (dingir) Ur-(dingir) Dun-fo-ud-du (E. A. H. 91 ; see
p. 327); (dingir) Ur-(dingir) En-zu-na (v. R. 52, 29 a\ iii. R. 68, 20 c);
(dingir) {Ga)lu-An-na (iii. R. 68, II «) ; (dingir) {G<i)lu-(dingir) Nin-ib (iii. R.
67, 54a) ; (dingir) Ur-gu-ru (1) (ii. R. 55, 8, gf d), Sec, stand either for old
kings or old patesis, whose names — with the exception of probably (dingir) Ur-
gu-ru ( = Ur-Giir I ?) — have not yet been found on tablets written by them-
selves.
APPENDIX
THE E. a: HOFFMAN COLLECTION
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS IN THE
GENERAL THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
NEW YORK CITY
THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS IN THE
GENERAL THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
NEW YORK CITY
In the year 1896 the^ Very Rev. E, A. Hoffman, D.D., LL.D.,
D.C.L., Dean of the General Theological Seminary, New York City,
bought from Mr. Noorian, formerly interpreter for the Pennsylvania
Expedition to Nippur, a collection of old and modern Babylonian
clay-tablets. In 1898 the same benefactor purchased six more
tablets of singular beauty and interest, which proved to be from the
time of Ur-Ba'u (two cSnes, E. A. H. 112, 113), Gudea (one cdne
and one dolerite tablet, E. A. H. 114, 115) (both of whom were
patesis of Shirpurla-Telloh), Rim-Aku or Rim-Sin, a contemporary
of Abraham (E. A. H. 262), and one tablet antedating even the
so-called Monument Blau ; see above, p. 12, note i.
The whole collection now comprises 262 tablets and fragments.
Dr. Body, who was present when these tablets were bought, and
who showed special interest in ascertaining whence they came,
reports that the places where these documents have been found are
Telloh, Borsippa, Warka, and Nippur.
The whole collection may be conveniently divided into two
parts —
I. Old Babylonian, E. A. H. 1-194, 261, 262.
II. New Babylonian, E. A. H. 195-260.
The oldest ruler of the Old Babylonian period, as represented in
this collection, is Ur-Ba'u, patesi of Shirpurla, 3500 b.c, and the
youngest of the New Babylonian is Philip^written either Pi-il-ip-su
iar matdtii^. A. H. 199) or Pi-li-ip-su sarru {Uiiu 2*'"», E. A. H.
Y
322 THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
245). The whole collection therefore covers a period of over
3,000 years.
I. The Old Babylonian Period may be classified again under
the following heads : —
(a) Representatives of the later patesis of Shirpurla-Telloh^ —
a. Ur-Ba'u, E. A. H. 112, 113.
/3. Gudea, E. A. H. 114, 115.
{b) Tablets belonging to a certain patesi of Ash-nun-na-'"' ,
Ur-Ningishzidda by name, E. A. H. no, iii.
(f) The fourth dynasty of Ur, E. A. H. 1-109, and also E. A. H.
1 16-157. Among the rulers belonging to this dynasty we find the
following mentioned: — Dungi III.", Bur-Sin II., and Gimil-Sin.
E. A. H. 1-109 ^^^ dated, and may be arranged as follows : —
II. Tablets belonging to Dungi III., E. A. H. 94-103, 1-25,
and 104.
g. Bur-Sin II., E. A. H. 26-90.
y. Gimil-Sin, E. A. H. 91-^3.
S. Tablets containing dates, which cannot as yet with
certainty be referred to any of the rulers of this dynasty,
E, A. H. 1 05-1 09.
i. Tablets which palaeographically belong to the fourth
dynasty of Ur, E. A. H. 1 16-157.
^. Fragments belonging to this period, E. A. H. 158-173.
a. With regard to the arrangement of these tablets, see above
sub ' dates of Dungi III.,' where it will be seen that O. B. I.
125 — on the basis of which we put E. A. H. 94-103 before
E. A. H. 1-25 — does not belong to the reign of Ine-Sin, but to
that of Dungi III.
Among the tablets belonging to Dungi III. we have eleven
' case-tablets ' — mostly receipts {su-ba-h') of grain {■§£). This grain
in most cases is designated by lugal = prima sorte. Sometimes
' These have been translated and .explained above under the two rulers
respectively. See pp. 184 and 194.
" Only in a seal-impression of a tablet dated from the reign of Bur-Sin IL
See p. 251.
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS 323
the tablets also state the price of the grain and for whom it was
bought. Comp. E. A. H. i :
10 gur h lugal
gur UD-KA-BAR-^la
^AG-GAL"" gud-ku.
The recipient of the grain is generally the ENGAR. Comp.
E. A. H. 3:
8 engar 3x60 + 30 (so. kd) h-lugal-ia
h-bi 5 gur 3 X 60 (sc. kd).
These case-tablets are all ' sealed,' which seals give the name of
the writer (dup-sar), and that of his father, together with the latter's
title — whenever he held an office. Comp. seal of E. A._ H. 4 :
( Gd)lu-&ir-pur-la-J'i
dup-sar
dumu Ur-i'''''^''-) Nina
nu-banda-\gud\
Sometimes the seal-inscription is in the form of an invocation.
Comp. E. A. H. 25 :
A-tu
PA-AL (= lahrU) lugal
Lugal-ka-gi-na
dup-sar
nita^-zu.
These seal-inscriptions are invariably accompanied by the well-
known legend peculiar to the fourth dynasty of Ur : The moon-god
sitting upon the throne accepts the devotions of the dup-sar, who is
led on his left hand by a minor god before the city-god of Ur,
lifting up his right hand in prayer.
E. A. H. 5 is interesting, because on it occurs the name
IP h I&I-DA-GAN. Comp, O. B. I. 125, rev., fourth line
from the end, and what has been said under ' dates of Dungi III.'
Although this case-tablet is somewhat mutilated, yet we may restore
that portion as follows : —
' Pronounce ZA-BAR = siparru, Br. 7819.
'^ Sag-gal -, comp. ii. r. 39, 54 c, <^ = ukum, n. w. b. p. 54.
324 THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
60 + x-gur 7 ka gar-zid lugal
SAG-GAL IP Ha m-Da-gan
i. e. feed for the damkar of Ishi-Dagan. (See however Index,
nom. pr. sub IP-ga . . . . )
Besides receipts, we find also expenses (zig-ga) of grain (E. A. H.
7). Among those containing lists of expenses should probably be
classed tablets like E. A. H. 9 :
5 X 600 + 9x60+7 gur 120 {ka) h-lugal
SAR ' UD-DU-A
^AG-bi-ta
5 X 600 + 9 X 60 + 7 gur 120 (to) h-lugal
NI-DUB {=Updku).
E. A. H. II is also extremely interesting. After stating how
many GIN (shekels) of money (ku-babbar) flowed into the treasury
from different persons :
12 gin IGI-z-GAL (= f) ku-babbar
ki-Ur-('''''srir)-Nmd dumu Ur-^'^'«-S'*-) Ba-u-ia
9 gin ki-Nam-ga-ni-ta, &c.,
it gives, on rev., 1. i, the total :
^U-NIGIN \ ma-na 8 gin
lal-igi-6-gal ku-babbar,
and goes on (1. 2) : —
Hag-bi-ta
\ ma-na ku-babhar
h-bi 2 7 (?) gur, &c,,
thus stating how much grain was bought for the money received.
E. A. H. 1 8 has two dates: mu-us-sa Ki-mal^i ba-^ul and
mu-ui-sa Ki-mah^i ba-^ul mu-iii-sa-a-bi, thus showing that the
explanation of mu-us-sa-a-bi given above is correct.
The remaining tablets are simply accounts of herds, which will
be explained further below. Tablets like these we shall call
'MU-GUB ZIG-GA ' tablets.
E. A. H. 94 is interesting and important, proving that the
eKpvession ^ A G-bi-la . . . NI-DUB is = &AG-bi-la . . . ZIG-
' Thus to be read most probably, and not SE-GJS.
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS 325
GA, which latter we find on this tablet. It also has two dates:
Mu Sa-d-ru-um-J'i ba-^ul and MU FN i'''»e'>-'i URU-KI MA^-
E-RU{M) NI-PAD.
E. A. H. 95 is a receipt {su-ba-ti) oiZID, {ZID)-GIG ', and SE.
The recipient is (GA)LU-d'»sir-? (? = the sign for the god of
GI^-UQ-ki).
E. A. H. 97, Lugal-ka-gi-na receives SE.
E. A. H. loi states how many gur and ka of le. different
ENGAR-RI-NE &U-BA-AB-TI.
E. A. H. 102, 103 are 'sag-bt-ta' tablets, the latter having two
dates: MU EN <-^i«si'^'> URU-KI MA&-E NI-PAD and MU
Sa-ai-ru-^' ba-gul. For the date of E. A. H. 104 see sub
D4jngi III., p. 265, 51.
j3. Tablets from the time of Bur-Sin 11.
Among these tablets we find 2 7 case-tablets, mostly ' receipts of
grain,' but also of
GUNIN-UD {=kupru), E. A. H. 63 ;
ZAL+ GI& Qamnu), E. A. H. 70 ;
ZID {kemu), E. A. H. 87 ;
KA-LUM-^IG (' sweet dates,' suluppu damkti) lugal, E. A. H. 60 ;
NI-NUN(= himetu), E. A. H. 72, &c., &c.
By far the greater number are MU-GUB ZIG-GA tablets;
some are accounts of wool i^SIG = hpatii), all of which are treated
of in full further below.
Of special interest seems to be E. A. H. 55.- This tablet is
dated from the E-GAL of Bur-Sin II., and gives an account of how
many KA of dates iJCA-LUM) were received for the sustenance
{,KU) of difierent servants (KAL) at different times (A-BU) :—
116 KAL KA-LUM 2 ka-ta
8 KAL 5 ka-ia
' In Neo-Babylonian contract-tablets GIG is written eitlier GIG-BA (some-
times with ^E before it, and sometimes not), GIG-BI, or GIG-A-BA (Strassen,
Darius, 198, II. 18, 20). It is mentioned after SE-BAR (wheat) and AS-AN
(barley). Hilprecht wants to read it GUL-BA, comparing the Talmudic
Vchw and translate it by "spelt."
326 THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
KA-LUM-bi 2^2 ka
a-du I '''"»
ii8 KAL 3 ka-ta
KA-LUM-bi i (gur) 54 ka
a-du 2 *■"*, &c.
Most of these tablets having been translated further below, we
now turn to —
y. Those of Gimil-Sin.
Only three tablets belong to the reign of this ruler, E. A. H. 9 1-93.
E. A. H. 91, however, is the largest tablet in this collection,
measuring 280x270x45 mm. Originally it was inscribed on
obverse and reverse; the former side, however, is almost com-
pletely destroyed. On the reverse we have nine columns, with an
average inscription of fifty lines. The beginning of Col. i. on
reverse, which apparently is the continuation of Col. ix. on obverse,
reads : —
4osi^-GUG-A
ki-Ur-Ba-bi-ta
PA NI-NA-NA
%oe&-GUG-A
5 GIR UR'KA-?'KI
/5?-GU-U-MU-/a
50 ka-lutn
200 -T'if-GUG-A
(.din^r) Nin-sun
10 50 ka-lum
M-Ama-ili ( UR'DINGIR-RA)-ta
PA NI-NA-NA
50 ka-lum.
Besides this^"-GZ7G (=Br. 6gi2?)-A and the KA-LUM are
also mentioned the ^'^-MA, ^'^-MA-AM-A, all of which are
measured according to GUR and KA.
From the above-given example it is evident that 1. 9 indicates
' the person for whom ' = 'For Ninsun'; 1. 11, the ' place from which,'
or the 'person from whom,' the KA-LUM were brought; 1. 13
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS 327
gives the ' total ' ; 1. 12 probably is the officer (PA) who receives
the KA-LUM ior Ninsun.
Among other gods who thus received S'^-GUG-A or KA-LUM
are to be found : '.dingir) jjr-idingir) Dun-pa-ud-du ; '4i»S''-) Nind;
(dingir) Niti'Mar-J'* ; {dingir) Niii-har-sag ; i'i'ȣf''-) Innarma ; {dingir)
Nin-gii-zid-da\ i'i'ȣ^'r) Ett-ki; idingir) jfn-^ and also the following'
persons: Ur-^'^'"^^'''^ KAL pa-te-si; Ur-gar pa-ie-si; Gu-de-a;
AMAT- Dun-pa-ud-du; Ur-^'^'"^''') Ba-u ; and the following houses
or temples : the Ti-ra-as (see Ur-Nina) ; An-ta-sur-ra (see Enanna-
tum); ^dingir) Dun-pa-ud-du E-GAL; E-BAR-BAR, &c., &c.
This tablet being extremely interesting on account of the names,
places, cities, and houses mentioned, I purpose to give a transcription
and translation elsewhere.
E. A. H. 92 is a receipt of ' dates,' and E. A. H. 93 one of 'money.'
8. Among the tablets belonging to this section, E. A. H. 108 is
important.
We find on this case-tablet the same seal-impression as on
E. A. H. 25, which latter tablet belonged to the reign of Dungi III.
Should the date of E. A. H. 108, mu EN-NAM- ? ¥i«gir) Dun-gi-
ra-ge ba-DUba-iug, therefore be referred to the reign of Dungi III. ?
If this were true, then the king would be the EN (lord) of his own
nam- ? (cult), which however is hardly possible. We have seen above
that the successor of Dungi III. was Bur-Sin II., but among the
dates of Bur-Sin II. we do not find any mention of this date. The
tablet is also important because on it two items (GU-GAL and
GU-TVR) are mentioned, not found elsewhere in this collection.
The whole inscription is as follows .•'—
Obv. 1 1 gur 30 ka ZID lugal
4gursx 60+ 10 {=BAR)+i ka (ZID)-GIG
Seal.
1 20 -I- 30 GU-GAL-GAL 120-1-30 GU-TUR-TUR '
ki-UR-NIGIN i^\. 92^i)-GAR-ia
' Comp. R. A. iv. No. iii. pi. xv. No. 44, where gu-gu-gal-gal and gu-gu-
tur-tur arc mentioned as being tm-iur, 'received.' They are the great GU
and the small G(7, i. e. ^ Hiilsenfriichie''; hence probably, as Hilprecht thinks,
'beans' (the large ones) and 'lentils' (the small ones).
323 THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
Rev. DUB (= tablet of) Lugal-ka-gi-na-ka
Seal.
Itu Innanna.
Date.
f. Among these are four case-tablets. The majority of the
tablets are receipts or expenses of grain, flour, &c., &c. Some are
accounts of herds {mu-gub zig-gd), others 'skins,' and others
again of ' wool.'
Of special interest are E. A. H. 139-153, all belonging to the
same class. They are lists of expenses {zig-ga) of 'date wine,'
' flour,' ' food,' and 'oil.' E. A. H. 140, e. g., reads partly : —
5 ka kai
I-lar-a-a-DUG dumu nu-banda
I kds lugal
eri An-sha-an-^^-me
Gir I-iar-a-DUG dumu nu-banda
An-sha-an-k^-ta DU-ni.
The eri An-sha-an-^'-me (me = pi. sign) here referred to are
undoubtedly the prisoners made by the kings of the fourth dynasty
ofUr.
(d) The dynasty of the kings of Larsa (Rim-Sin), E. A. H,
262 — which tablet is also published in C. T. part I, No. 96-4-4, 2,
(«) The dynasty of the Kassites, E. A. H. 175-194. Of the
representatives of this dynasty we find in the E. A. H. collection
the following mentioned •.^—
Bur-na-bu-ri-ia-ds, E. A. H. 175.
Na-zi-Mu-ru-ut-ta-ai, the fourth year (E. A. H. 176) and the
thirteenth year (E. A. H. 177), i.e. 1290 and 1281 b.c.
respectively.
Ka-dii{siQ)-man-Tur-gu, the third year (E. A. H. 178), i.e.
1265 B.C., and the thirteenth year, i. e. 1255 b.c. (E, A. H.
179)-
{dingir) Ku-dur-ri-^^i»?ir) EN-LIL (= Turgu), the eighth year,
i.e. about 1364 b. c, E. A. H. 180.
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS 329
SIBIR (Br. 8847) iarru, E. A, H. 181 j comp. Asurnasira-
pal II, Annals, col ii. 84 : ' Sibir, king of Karduniash.'
According to the analogy of the subscriptions already found, we
would refer E. A. H. 182 to this period, which mentions, after the
date mu 10 *"«•, a certain GIR-RI-A-AB-BA. Is this latter to
be classed among the kings of this dynasty ? The absence of the
sign for Lugal would not tell against this, for both Burnaburiash
and Nazi-Muruttash have not the sign for Lugal after their
names.
Some of these tablets are receipts {ma-hi-ir) of SE, others lists
of grain-income , paid to various temples in a certain city during
specified months. Comp. e.g. E. A. H. 177 :
^E GI&-BAR-GAL la i-na libbi {^AG) Te-li-ti-J'i U salti
12 '^«« Na-zi-Mu-ru-ut-ta-al li-iu ('•''M Tisrtti (DUL-AZAG,
Br. 9608) sa lata 12 -^"^ a-di ("'■i") Nisannu {BAR) sa satti 13
l^"* i-na ZA-RAD-JM-i'' nhd-nu {SE-NU).
The body of the tablet then further states the various items
received or given by sundry persons for the different gods. At the
end it gives the ' total ' :
napharu (Br. 1145) .§^ nad-nu isiu {TA) <."■&") TiMH adi (EN)
{ar&u) JSfisannu {BAR-ZAG-A) i-na ZA-RAD-IM-ki nad-nu
sattu 1 3 *""» Na-zi-Mu-ru-ut-ta-as.
Others have a shorter heading. Comp. E. A. H. 178:
^E GI^-BAR-GAL M i-na KAR-UD-NUN-ki ihu{TA) (""-S")
Nisannu {BAR) adi ^"''i") Ululu (Br. 10758) la Utti 3 >""» Ka-dis-
man-Tur-gu a-na SE-BA (or TU?) nad-nu.
Or we find only :
&E-GI&-BAR-GAL MU-BI-IM
(i. e. which was expended yearly).
II. Modern Babylonian Tablets.
The tablets written during this period are very varied as regards
their contents :
33° THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
{a) Astronomical texts, E. A. H. 195, 196.
(h) Lists of gods, E. A. H. 197-200.
E. A. H. 197, 198 are identical. They have three columns; e. g.
A \ A \ ('■'«) A-nu-uni, &c.
E. A. H. 197 has a long inscription on the reverse, the beginning
of which is much mutilated.
(c) Contract-tablets from the reigns of the following rulers : —
a. Samahsum-uMn, the thirteenth year of his reign, E. A. H.
202.
Bgl-uballi-it brings a lawsuit against Nabii-u-sal-li and Samas-
ndsi-ir, to return to him the f- Il--e-tu and the «»»«'» kin-ni-h. The
two defendants are not willing to do this, but offer 5 ma-na of
money for those slaves. Bd-uballi-it refuses to accept this money,
goes to a ddinu, and complains. The judge decides in favour of
Bel-uballi-it, and orders that the slaves be given back to the original
possessor. Nabd-u-sal-li and Samai-ndsi-ir recognized their evil
action, and ' ud-da-ru mimma a-na Bel-uballi-it i-nam-di-nu,' i. e.
' they felt sorry for that which they had done to B^l-uballt-it ."
The tablets of this period are generally sealed, which seal is
attested by the scribe. Comp. e. g. E. A. H. 227, left side:
Kunuk Marduk-zer-ib-ni dup-sar.
The same seal-inscription is also found on the right side. Some-
times we find, besides the kunuk, also the su-pur, i. e. ' nail-imprints '
of certain {<"nliu) rnu-kin-nu,' or ' witnesses,' who are always men-
tioned in these contract-tablets. Comp. e. g. E. A. H. 202 :
su-pur Nabil-u- sal-It u Samas-ndsi-ir Mma kunukki-iu-nu, i.e.
' nail-imprints of N. and S. instead of their seals.'
These nail-imprints — generally three in number — are put in
most cases on the four sides of the tablet. After the witnesses
have been mentioned — who are introduced either by :
(i) ina ku-nuk duppi MU-""^ (= Mali) followed by pdnt (or
mahir = ST), or by only
(2) «»»«'« mu-kin-nu, or even shortly
(3) ina pdni — then follows the ««««'« sangu sa-lir duppi, or often
shortly represented by the simple dup-sar, i. e. the writer. Then
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS 331
follows the place, where the tablet was written, ending with the
month, day, and year of the specific king of Babylon under whose
reign the business was transacted. Comp. E. A. H. 202 :
Bar-sip-^' {arhu) Ttlrtlu dmu 13 *■"" iatlu 13 ^"^^ Samal-sum-
uktn lar DIN-TIR-ki (i. e. Babylon).
Sometimes it happens that some persons are present at a certain
business transaction, who are not witnesses, ' amilu mu-kin-nu,' in
a legal sense. These persons are introduced generally by ' tna
a-ia-bi' ' in the presence of.'
Among other kings mentioned on these tablets we find :
0. Nahil-hidur-mur lar DIN-TIR-^', the fourteenth year of
his reign, E. A. H. 203, 204.
y. Nergal-iar-usur lar DIN-TIR-''', th^'firsi year of his reign,
E, A. H. 205.
8. Nabd-nd-'-id lar DIN-TIR-i'i, the third and fourth year
of his reign, E. A. H. 206, 207.
(. Ku-ra-al lar DIN-TIR^' lar matdti, the seventh year of
his reign, E. A. H. 208.
^. Kam-bu'Zi-ia lar DIN-TIR-^' lar matdii, the first and sixth
year of his reign, E. A. H. 209, 210.
17. E. A. H. 211-232 are tablets dating from the different years
of king Darius, who generally bears the title lar DIN-TIR-^'
(or KA-DINGIR-lRAy^i) lar matdii (written either KUR-""'
or KUR-KUR or even KUR-KUR-«^). The first year is the
earliest and the thirty-fifth is the latest mentioned. Remark-
able also are the different forms in which the name Darius
occurs :
Da-ri- -a-miil
Da-ri- -ul-lu
Da-ri- -ia-mztl
Ba-ri-ia (=Br. i2igo)-a-mul
Da-ri-ia (Br. \2\ij6)-mus
Da-a-ri-ia (/+ A)-mul
Da-ri-ia {/-\- A)-mul
Da-ri-'-lu
332 THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
Da-ri-a-mul
Da-ri- -mui
Da-ri- -a-mu-ul
Da-ri-ia (I+A)-a-mus
Da-a-ri-mus
Da-a-ri-ia (/+ A)-'-us-su
Da-ri-ia (1+ A)-mu-us
Da-ri-a-niu-us
6. The second year of Ih-li-ia-ar-U (Xerxes), ' king of Babylon,
king of the lands,' E. A. H. 233.
I. Tablets belonging to Artaxerxes, whose name is written either
Ar-tah-iat-su or Ar-tak-lat-su. He bears the title of larru only.
The tablets are dated from the years between the third and thirty-
ninth inclusive, E. A. H. 234-244.
If, Two tablets from the time of Philip, E. A. H. 199 and 245.
X. E. A. H. 246-260 are fragments of New Babylonian tablets.
The contents of these New Babylonian tablets cover almost
everything which may happen in the daily intercourse of men.
There we have bequests (ina hu-ud libbi-^u ik-nu-uk-ma pdni u-^a-
ad-git) ; selling (a-na kaspi idditi) of shares, lands, property of
various kinds, &c., &c. ; statements that one person owes another
(ina eli or ina muhhi) dates, figs, wine, or money, which latter
has to be paid back either with or without interest. Sometimes
it is also stated that if the debtor fails to pay by a certain date,
then the money shall bear interest {ki Id iddannu irabii). Rents
for houses or gardens, lawsuits, and many other interesting ' con^
tracts ' are also to be found among the tablets of this collection.
Most of these tablets are dated from Borsippa, the old Ki-nu-
nir-^'; others come from Gir-su-^', Tik-ab-ba-^', Nind-^', Uru-um-
'''-ma, En-lil-^', Unug-'''-ga, &c., &c. Dr. Body's statement (see
above) is therefore fully corroborated by the subscriptions of these
tablets.
It may be well to supplement this general description with a
more detailed account of the Old Babylonian tablets, especially
with those belonging to the fourth dynasty of Ur. They give us
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS 333
a fair representation of the daily life of the people of Babylonia
some 500 years before the time of Abraham. It will be seen
that almost all of them are related to what may be called the
' rural life ' of the Old Babylonians, thus showing that the chief
occupation of the people at that time was ' to till the ground and to
raise cattle.'
Tablets caUed 'MU-GUB ZIG-GA.'
E. A. H. 13-16, 19-24, from the time of Dungi III.
E. A. H. 28-31, 35-46, from the time of Bur-Sin II.
The above-given tablets are ' lists of cattle,' and state —
1. How many of those cattle, which compose the flock of
a certain shepherd {ENGAR or NI-KIT), whose name is given
generally at the bottom of each tablet, are ' present ' {MU-GUB).
2. How many were in some way or another 'removed' from
the flock. This ' removal ' of the flocks may be caused either by —
{a) expenditure {ZIG-GA), or
(3) sacrifices {RIG-RIG-GA) or some 'malady' called ID-
PA, or
{c) LAL-NI, or
{k) death {BA-TIL).
In this paragraph we very often find that only the formulas are
given, without actually stating the number of the sheep which thus
were either ' consumed ' or ' snatched away ^.' Sometimes we also
find that the number was given, but erased again.
Following this, the sum total {^U-NIGIN) gives us the whole
number of the cattle that either are present or removed.
Then follows the name of the shepherd {ni-ku or engar) to whom
the flock belongs ; sometimes also the name of the chief shepherd
{nu-banda-gud) or overseer {PA), under whose supervision the
shepherd stands. The tablet concludes with the name of the city
' This shows that the dufsar wrote ahead while the cattle were connted,
leaving the spaces blanlc, if the result of the counting required it.
334 T^^ ^- ^- HOFFMAN COLLECTION
(introduced by SAG) where it is written, followed by the date
[mu).
Without going further into detail here, it will be advisable
to explain —
(i) the expressions used in these tablets, and
(2) the different names of the cattle.
This will be followed by a list of names to be found in the
above-given tablets, together with a translation of four of them —
E. A. H. 14, 19, 3S, 37 — which will be sufficient for our purpose.
I. MU-GUB.
(a) With this expression the first paragraph of these lists con-
cludes. In the lu-nigin paragraph the expression is repeated, but
has the form GUB-BA. It signifies the 'cattle' that 'are there,'
'are existing,' 'are present.' GUB, Br. i^^^'^^nazdzu, H. W. B. 4.55.
In E. A. H. 1 5, rev., 2, we have : lu-nigin 117 udu guh, con-
sequently only GUB for GUB-BA. The expression UDU is
remarkable here, showing that under the UDU were classed
ganam, udu-vi, sal-puhddu, puhddu-ul, and the uristi-sag. In none
of the other tablets does UDU occur in this iu-nigin paragraph.
For MU-GUB we sometimes find in these tablets GUB-BA-A-
AN, apparently with the same meaning. Comp. R. A. iii. p. 122
and p. 123, note to line 4, and below, 6, i, 2.
(3) In some tablets GUB-BA-A-AN has the meaning ' to
furnish,' ' to deliver '=^kdnu ii '.
{c) In the expressions :
gud-engar- G UB-BA
mngir) Nin-Mar-^'-ka, E. A. H. 33, 27, 28
(comp. also E. A. H. 34, 26, 27), the GUB-BA means only /^(f««=
^jlS^'to be' (notice: GUD-ENGAR, nol=: ENGAR-GUD,
see under Engar), and may be translated : ' oxen of the shepherd
(who is in the service) of the goddess Nin-Mar-'''' or ' oxen be-
longing to the shepherd employed by the goddess Nin-Mar-^',^
i. e. oxen of the shepherd of the goddess Nin-Mar-^', or ' oxen
employed for the tilling of the ground belonging to (J ^) the
goddess Nin-Mar-ki'; for ENGAR may belong also to GUD,
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS 335
explaining what kind of GUD they are. The latter seems to be the
more probable explanation, because we find also such expressions
as DUP-SAE-GUD-ENGAR.
ENGAR, according to Br. 1023, = ereiu, H. W. B. p. 140, and
irriiu. The GUD-ENGAR then would be 'the oxen that are
employed for the tilling of the ground/ ' boeu/s employh a la culture!
(d) Such expressions as :
UZ GUB-BA
e-gal la dingir-ri-ne
lag Nind-^', R. A. iii. p. 126, and ibid. p. 124 :
udu-? GUB-BA
e-gal la dingir-ri-ne
sag Nind-^'
also occur. Here GUB-BA undoubtedly has the meaning J ^J^S
= ' to belong ' : ' cattle belonging to " the temple of (jfa= Semitism !)
the gods " in Nina.' Thureau-Dangin, 1. c, translates both passages
with ' achy en chivres ' and ' actiy en moutons.' But why ? The
translation ' apparlenant,' ibid. p. 1,31, is much better, and the
only correct one.
2. ZIG-GA.
ZIG, according to Br. 2303, means nalil, H. W. B. 484, 'to
take,' ' take away,' and nasdhu, H. W. B. 471, ' to take away,' ' carry
away.'
ZIG-GA then signifies those cattle which 'were taken away'
from those that ' were present,' i. e. from the herd. It may not be
impossible that the animals which are said to be ZIG-GA are
those that ' were consumed,' in contradistinction to those that were
' rig-rig-ga.'
ZIG-GA then may stand for 'consumed,' 'expended,' 'expendi-
ture' in general.
ZIG-GA—
(a) is found alone, without any subject. This is generally the
case; comp. E. A. H. 19, 10.
(6) with a subject, stating who it was that ' took away,' 'expended'
the sheep; e.g. E. A. H. 35, 8-10.
336 THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
3. RIG-RIG-GA.
Br. 2594 gives for RIG-RIG-GA the Assyr. lakdtu, H. W. B.
385, 'to take away,' 'snatch away.' Comp. ii. R. 38, 11, e,f,
amihi LJ^Q RIG-RIG-GA =z la-kit kur-ba-an-iti = Gabensammler,
Delitzsch, H. W. B. 35 1 , sub ' kurbannu.' If ZIG-GA signifies the
cattle that 'were consumed,' 'expended,' RIG-RIG-GA may
denote those that were either —
(a) ' snatched away ' for the purpose of sacrifices — so in the most
cases where RIG-RIG-GA stands alone, i.e. RIG-RIG-GA =
viakdtu (Br. 2595), H. W. B. 424. Comp. also Sm. 2148 (in
Delitzsch, W. B. p. 196; Z. K. ii. 6), 8-11 :
GANAM GAD (sic?) BI RIG-RIG-GA-MU, i. e. lah-ra u pu-
had-sa ii-iam-ka-tu ;
Z7Z Br. 20^0-B I RIG-RIG-GA-MU, i.e. en-za tt la-la-sa
■d-lam-ka-tu ;
or (p) that were ' killed,' ' snatched away ' by some malady. In
this latter case RIG-RIG-GA is followed by ID-PA (or A-SIG)
= asakku, H. W. B. 144. Comp, R. A. iii. p. 125, 1. 12.
4. LAL-NI.
A. That this expression must signify ' cattle, which in some way
or another are not existing', is evident from the SU-NIGIN
paragraph. There we find the cattle that are Z^Z-iV7 enumerated
after those that were ZIG-GA and RIG-RIG-GA.
The places where LAL-NI occurs are :
(a) In O. B. I. 126, iii. 7-9, LAL-NI \% found after BA-TIL:
I (sic, read 2) ansu-ul BA-TIL
LABAR-A-AN
LAL-NI-2.
Ibid. iv. 16-18:
I anlu-ul BA-TIL
LABAR-A-AN
LAL-NI-i
{b) after RIG-RIG-GA; see O. B. I. 126, v., the last four
lines :
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS 337
2 anku-sal .
r anlu-us
RIG-RIG-GA
LAL-NI-i
{c) Compare with the above O. B. I. 126, vii. 3 ff. :
u, 2 lid-\ar\
I gud-[gif\
RIG-RIG-GA
LABAR-A-AN
1 gud-gii
NIN-&ID NA-DA-TUM-ta '
LAL-NI-2.
and ibid. col. vi. 21 ff . :
/3. I gud-gii
I gud-I
RIG-RIG-GA
LABAR-A-AN
2 gud-gi^
NIN-^in NA-DA-TUM-ta.
From the above-given examples it is evident that LAL-NI must
have some such meaning as ' minus' for in (a) 2 (sic, not i ) are said
to be 'dead' {BA-TIL), hence we have a 'minus' of two (LAL-
NI-2). In (5) three animals are said to be RIG-RIG-GA,
' taken away,' hence ' a minus of 3 ' {LAZ-NI-3). In (c) n. three
animals are said to be RIG-RIG-GA, but one animal was received
from the estate {NIN-,§ID=niiasu) of Nadatum, thus diminishing
the ' minus of 3 ' by one, hence we have only LAL-NI-2. In (c) |8.
' For NIN-SID ^ nikasu, see Br. 12082 ; H. W. B. 463. For the nom.
pr. NA-DA-TUM, see O. B. I. 124, obv., li. 9. Translate : ' From the estate
of Nadatum.' Nadatum seems to have been a man of wealth,' as is apparent
from O. B. I. 1 24, 126, in both of which tablets he is mentioned frequently,
however with this distinction, that in 0. B. I. 1 24 the expression always runs,
Na-da-ium-ta, showing that he must have been living at the time (Dungi III.)
vfhen that tablet was written. In O. B. I. 126 we always find NIN-SID
NA-DA- TUM-ta (at the time of Bur-Sin II. Nadatum was dead).
z
338 THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
two animals are RIG-RIG-G A, hut two others were received from
the estate oi NADATUM, hence no 'minus' (LAL-NI) is given.
The examples under (3) and (c) confirm this explanation of LAL-
NI ; hence we would read in {a), instead of i an^u-us BA-TIL-=.
2 anlu-ui BA-TIL. Such mistakes in the numerals seem, how-
ever, to be frequent in O. B. I. 126; comp. e.g. reverse, ii. 12-17
(1. 12 ought to be 6 gud-gif), ibid., obv., col. v. 16-21 (1. 16 ought
to be 3 gud-gil). The above-given explanation is confirmed by the
following other passages: O. B. I. 126, iv. 16-18; iv. 24-end;
R. A. iii. p. 130, II, 12.
We are thus justified in postulating for LAL-NI or LAL-NI-
A-AN (only another form for LAL-NI; see 6, i, 2) the meaning
'minus' or 'not existing.' The loss may have been caused either
by the ' death ' {BA-TIL) of the animal, or by a ' malady ' (^-
SIG), or some other cause. Thus we understand why in the
E. A. H. tablets the LAL-NI paragraph sholild in most cases
give only the names for the cattle, without stating how many were
lost. Comp. e. g.
E. A. H. 16, rev. i, Z.4Z-iV7 (erasure) udu-ul, none were lost.
E. A, H. 13, rev. 4-6, ganam udu-ui
puhddu
LAL-NI-A-AN.
This also throws light upon the following passage, E. A. H. 22,
obv. II, and rev. i ff. : —
LAL-NI I ganam 3 (erasure) '
LAL-NI-A-AN LAB AR- A- AN
LAL-NI 22 udu RUG-RUG IM-MA,
i- e. Minus (loss) i ewe 3 mature sheep.
Deficit.
Minus 22 sheep, bodies (flesh = meat) of the IM-MA.
' The cattle after the numeral 3 ought not to have been erased, for the
Su-NIGIN gives a6 LAL-NI. The traces on the tablet indicate
3 udu-ui.
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS 339
The LAL-NI here then indicates the ' loss ' which arose from the
fact that the oflBcial, called IM-MA, 'took away' from the herd those
twenty-two sheep which were his (sc. bodies) = RUG-GA IM-MA.
It is however important to note that the expression LAL-NI
occurs very often just before the animals (sheep) called RUG-GA
[IM-MA] ; see E. A. H. 19, rev. i; 20, rev. 5; 24, rev. i; 29,
rev. i; 37,9; 40, rev. 4, &c., &c. Now officials 'take away' or
' diminish ' the herds only by those sheep which are paid them as
' their hire,' which are ' due to them/ which are their rightful 'income.'
Indeed this latter signification is the only correct one here. With
this agrees exactly a statement like this, which also occurs very often
in the E. A. H. tablets:—
XX GIN KU-BABBAR
LAL-NI RUG-GA,
i. e. so and so many shekels of silver, minus their income (=interest),
were received, &c.
If this be true, then the animals c?XS.tii. RUG-GA served as a kind
of compensation for the officials of the herds.
B. (a) Of similar meaning is another LAL-NI, occurring in
those documents which state the income and the expenditures of
certain things (e. g. grain, dates, flour, &c., &c.). After the expendi-
tures have been subtracted from the income, and if there remains
still a ' remainder,' this ' remainder ' is marked by LAL-NI. The
Neo-Babylonian equivalent is = LAL-DI, as has been shown by
Oppert in Z. A. x. p. 49. LAL-NI ihen marks 'the balance on
hand ' = ' its remainder (is).'
This is the signification of the LAL-NI occurring in E. A. H.
37> 9 ff- : V
Z puhddu-US LAL-NI rug-ga sag-udu-ui-ku
Ur-Gu-la ni-ku
zig-ga,
i. e. 5 he-lambs, remainder of the RUG-GA ('income'), exchanged
for the ' mature ' sheep
Ur-Gula, the chief shepherd,
has taken away.
z 2
340 THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
(b) If on the other hand the expenditures exceed the income, the
sign DIR is used {DIR=Br. 3729, atdru, H. W. B. 248). DIR
then is the opposite of LAL-NI, and means literally ' to go over
the measure,' ' to exceed it.'
Note : DIR among other places is also used in E. A. H. 43, 6 :
7 puMdu-U^ DIR. Here DIR states ' the over and above ' of the
puhaddti th.3X were MU-GUB, for the very same puMdu-U^ were
mentioned already in 1. 4.
C. LAL, when standing between two numerals, means ' minus,'
lit. ' there remaineth.' E. g.
20-LAL-i = 20 there remaineth (= minus) one = 19 ; comp. Lat.
un-de-viginti
20-LAL-2 = 18 = Lat. duo-de-viginti
lo-ZAZ-i = 9, &c., &c.
Comp. Jensen, Kosm. p. 106, 2 ; Reissner, J. A. O. S. 18, p.. 374.
5. In some of these tablets we find the expression BA-TIL =
Hebr. niD, 'to die'; see R. A. iii. p. 127, 1. 14: x gud-gti ba-til,
i. e. is dead; and ibid. p. 130 : i Hd-al ba-til. This BA-TIL then
signifies another class of ' not existing ' cattle.
6. Very often we also meet in these texts the expression
LABAR-A-AN.
In order to understand the force of this expression it will be
well to enumerate the places where it is found and in what con-
nection it stands.
(a) Alone it occurs in E. A.H. 29, rev. 2. In line i we
have :
LAL-NI 10 udu-ui RUG-RUG IM-MA ;
then follows a line left blank, and after this
LABAR-A-AN (see K).
{b) After LAL-NI, E. A. H. 29, obv. 1 1 :
LAL-NI 37 udu-ui
LABAR-A-AN.
ic) Mitr LAL-NI-A-AN, E. A. H. 20, rev. i ff. :
LAL-NI 25 ganam 18 udu-ui
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS 341
6 puhddu
LAL-NI-A^AN
LABAR-A-AN.
This is the most common occurrence. Comp. E. A. H. 21, rev.
3.4-
((/) LABAR-A-AN with LAL-Nl-A-AN is to be found in one
line. Comp. E. A. H. 22, obv. 11 and rev. i : —
LAL-NI I ganam 3 [udu-uf\
LAL-NI-A-AN LABAR-A-AN.
{e) After ZIG-GA inE. A. H. 19, obv. 10, 11 :
• ganam i udu-us
(line left blank)
ZIG-GA
LABAR-A-AN.
(/) After RIG-RIG-GA, R. A. iii. p. 130, 1. 4 :
I aiiiu-sal-II
I anlti-sal-I
RIG-RIG-GA
LABAR-A-AN.
Comp. with this also E. A. H. 40, obv. 8-10 :
So and so many animals,
RIG-RIG-GA
LAL-NI-A-AN
LABAR-A-AN.
(g) After BA-TIL. Comp. R. A. iii. p. 127, 11. 14, 15 :
I gud-gik BA-TIL
LABAR-A-AN.
, Qi) In some texts GUB-BA LABAR-A-AN is only another
form orvariantfor G'£''.5-.5.4-.4-.4iV(R.A. iii.p. 128,1.15). Comp.
with this also (e) and (</).
(t) From these examples we see that —
(i) LABAR-A-AN is found behind all verb-forms occurring in
these tablets, such as —
342 THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
GUB-BA (K)
ZIG-GA (e)
RIG-RIG-GA (/)
BA-TIL (^)
LAL-NI(b)
and because we have (2) such forms as
LAL-NI-A-AN
LABAR-A-AN {c)
as well as
LAL-NI-A-AN LABAR-A-AN (d)
on one hand, and
GUB-BA-A-AN
with the variant
GUB-BA LABAR-A-AN {h)
on the other, hence we conclude —
(<z) That the verb-forms ending in A-AN are of the same
meaning as those without this ending ; comp. GUB-BA = GUB-
BA-A-AN {h). The ending A-AN therefore is only an emphatic
ending; comp. Br. 11401.
{6) That LABAR-A-AN is some kind of an emphatic verbal
postfix, which may be rightly compared with the Assyr. -ma. Hence
GUB-BA or GUB-BA-A-AN = izzazH,
GUB-BA-LALAR-A-AN = izzazH-ma.
•j. SAG-KU.
In V. R. 51, 51 ff. we have :
SAG-e-es ^a-ra-ab-PA-KAB-du-ga, which is translated ana
h'rikti M'iarikiu. Comp. with this Gudea D, iii. 1 2 ; SA G-KU
im-mi-P A-KAB-DU^, which Jensen translates '■ und schenkte . . .
zum Geschenk,' Comp. also Br. 3526. SAG therefore =hnktu,
'a present,' H. W. B. p. 692. SAG . . . KU then would be
' a present for . . . ,' and this in the sense of ' exchange for . . .'
= lupiliu in Neo-Babylonian contracts; see Tallquist, Spr. d.
Contr. p. 113, sub ^KB, and comp. Thureau-Dangin in R. A. iii.
p. 123, 1. 12, and H. W. B. p. 514.
' See also Eannatnm, Galet A, vii. 6 ; O. B. I. 109, 4.
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS 343
E. A. H. 16,6:
10 ganam S A G-udu-tis- K U shovXd therefore be translated :
I o ewes (a) present for {ku) sheep that are of age, or
10 ewes received (= present SAG) instead of {ku) sheep that
are of age, i.e. ' 10 ewes exchanged for mature sheep.'
The following cattle are mentioned in these tablets : —
8. GANAM.
This sign is composed out of LAG ABU (Br. 10151) with the
sign for GUD or GUD-GUD inserted; hence it is equivalent
to Br. 10256 or 1025a. For the reading of these signs, see Z. A.
iii. p. 203. The latter occurs in O. B. I. 87, ii. 44 ; the former in
Gudea F, iv. i ; see also Hommel, S. L. No. 383.
The Assyrian pronunciation is not udru = Hebr. "TIJ/ (Br. 1. c),
' a herd,' nor par-ru = Jl'jS (Z. A. iii. p. 202), for )L'iS according
to Noldeke (Z. A- 1. c. note i) is = nB'3D, and is explained in Efr. i.
174 f by lu^A. Nor is it 'junges Scha/' = kr&h. j\^jjiji (' Lamm,
junge Gazelle ') 1, but it is the Hebrew •'H'!, comp. Ji^ , Ji*,,
and means an 'ewe, Mutter schaf, brebis ' ; see Homtnel, Z. D. M. G.
46 (1892), p. 566. This is evident from Sm. 2148 (Lotz, T. P.
171; Delitzsch, A. W. 196), 11. 4, 5, where we have GANAM-
GAD (sic'})-BI=lah-ra u pu-had-sa, i.e. 'the ewe and its lamb.'
See also Br. 10252 ; H. W. B. p. 375. For GANAM=im-mir-
tum (Z. A. iii. p. 203), see Hommel, S. L, No. 384, and notice
that GA-NAM stands for original GA-NAG (Gudea, Cyl. B, x. 4,
uz-azag uz-ga-nag) = ' milk-drinking.' This animal always is at
the head of these lists, and is never found with any distinguishing
addition. Honrmel thinks that the Arab, ^.ii is = GANAM.
9. UDU.
This animal is generally mentioned immediately after the
GANAM, For the pronunciation of this sign, see Hommel,
S. L, No. 403 : ugug, udub, udu, idib. Comp. also Gudea G, v.
14, 15; Jensen, K. B. iii\ p. 62 ; A. L^ 289; Br. 10673.
According to E. A. H. 15, rev. 2 (see above under 1 (a)), UDU
comprise the GANAM, UDU-U&, SAL-puhddu, pul}ddu-U&,
' Nor is it = the Hebr. ms, IS, ' young cow.'
344 THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
urisu-SA G. From this then it is evident that UDU is the general
expression for caitle — including all kinds of sheep and goats —
standing here not only for Assyr. tmmeru (H. W. B. p. 92), 'Lamm,
Schaf (comp. Arab.^|, ' agnus'), but for Hebr. fKS, 'caitle,'
' Kleinvieh ' (comp. Arab. ^U, IIjU), H. W. B. 556. According
to E. A. H. 104 the udu, however, stand also in contradiction to goats,
hence must have also a more restricted or specific meaning, i, e. they
signify ' sheep '= Arab. jjU. See below, p. 365, note to 1. z8.
In the GUB-BA paragraph UDU is never found alone, but has
either the sign for GAL or US after it ; comp. E. A. H. 29, 2, 3.
We have to distinguish therefore between the (a) UDU-US and
the (^) UDU-GAL.
{a) UDU-U^.
The sign for US is here always that of T^ C. 7, which, as Amiaud,
1. c, says, ' semble avoir M employ^ surtout dans I' expression com-
plexe DUMU-US " enfant mdle." ' In Gudea G, iv. i, we have the
sign US as given in T. C. 74, Jensen, K. B. iii'. p. 60, translates
UDU-US (T. C. 74) by ^ geschlechtsreife Schafe,' and adds in
note o : ' Mdnnlich kann US (T. C. 74) hier nicht heissen, da es,
wie Amiaud hemerkt, nicht das Zeichen ist, welches nach DUMU ■=
Kind " mdnnlich " bezeichnet!
That even this sign used here (=T. C. 7) cannot mean ' male ' —
although it is that which is used after I)UMU to express the idea
'male' — seems to be evident from E. A. H. 28, 3, 2 UDU-US
BAR-RUG-GA, compared with ^v. R. 28, 52 a, RUG SAL-A&-
KAR US-NU-ZU, which latter is translated by ; malak H-ni-ki
la pi-ti-ti. U&-ZU then is = pitii, Br. 5050, H. W. B. p. 552,
' to open ' ; ma^ka pitii, ' to open the skin ' with regard to sexual
intercourse = the Hebr. JJT'.
BAR, according to ii. R. 39, 4 a (comp. Br. 1791, KA-BAR-
RA), means also pitii, ' to open.'
An UDU-U^ BAR-RUG-GA then would be an animal {UDU-
U§) that is ' opened {BAR) as regards its skin (RUG),' i.e. ' ein
Thier, das besprungen ist.' Hence it follows that U& (although
= T. C. 7) cannot mean ' male,' and thus UDU-US must mean
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS 345
a (feminine) sheep {udu) that is U^. Indeed in E. A. H. 40, rev. 2,
we have UDU-U^-GAL {IK), which GAL shows clearly that
U^ is something which the sheep either is or has. And if the
UDU-US are said ' to be covered' (= besprungen = BAR-RUG-
GA), then U,^ can only mean a sheep which can- or may be
' covered ' = ' etn geschlechtsreifes Scha/,' i. e. US = nV^ (H. W. B.
p. 614 ; Z. A. iii. p. 201, 4 ; Amiaud, Z. A. iii. 44 : ' «^ doii r/-
pondre ici h. tassyrteti ridil et signifier quelque chose comme " adulte "
ou " domestique " '}. Jensen therefore is undoubtedly right when he
says (K. B. iii ^. p. 60, note 0) : ' Vielleicht bezteht sich . . . US auf
die weibliche Geschlechtsreife! Hence
UDU-US=^^ ein {weibliches') geschlechtsreifes Schafl
UDU-U& BAR-RUG-GA=A\\Xo, which is 'covered' {besprungen).
{b) UDU-GAL.
In all the lists where this animal is mentioned, it precedes the
UDU-U&.
In iv. R. 23, No, I, col. i. 8, 9, we have GUD-GAL GUD-
MAG explained by gu-gal-lum gu-mah-lm ; comp. also iv. R. 20,
No. r, 26, 27 : GUD-GAL-GAL-LA = gumahhe.
The UDU-GAL maybe therefore the ' great sheep,' nar i^oxriv,
i. e, the Assyr. luKmu or ailu = Hebr. ?^^, the ' ram,' ' Scha/bock,'
' b^lier! Comp, also urisu-GAL.
{c) In Gudea G, iii. i (from below) we also find the expression :
udu ^JE, which .Su, according to Jensen (K. B. iii '. p. 60, note tt),
signifies ' die mcinnliche Geschlechtsreife^ in contradistinction to
udu-US ; see above, 9 a.
10. The UDU, 'sheep,' are followed by the 'lambs.' The sign
for ' lamb ' is that to be found in Br, 5489, The Sumerian pro-
nunciation of this sign is doubtful (Jensen, K. B. iii \ p. 60, note 7,
and Gudea G, iv.- 2); comp. however Hommel, S. L. No. 199
=^ad. We transcribe this sign always by its Assyrian equivalent :
puhddu. See H. W, B, p. 170.
The following puhaddti are mentioned :
{a) puhddu-U$, E. A. H. 13, 4.
{b) SAL-puhddu, E. A. H. 13, 3.
346 THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
(c) puhddu-BA-UR, E. A. H. 19, 4.
\d) puMdu-NU-UR, E. A. H. 19, 5.
U& and SAL no doubt are used with regard to gender, BA-UR
and NU-UR with regard to age.
(a) puhddu-U&. The US sign is the same here as that used
behind UDU-U^. Here however it retains its original meaning
'male'; the 6'^Z shows that clearly. PuMdu-U^ \% Xhextiote. =
male lamb.
(3) \i puhddu-US = he-lamb, then SAL-puhddu = she-lamb =
puhattu, H. W. B. 170. Notice also that the SAL-puhddu precedes
\hi:puMdu-U^\
(f) A little more diflBcult are the expressions BA-UR and NU-UR
(C^7?=Br. 11887). As U& is the opposite of SAL, so is BK-UR
the opposite of NU-OT?. In all those texts in which Xht puhddu-
BA-UR {-NU-UR) are mentioned, the puhddu-U^ {SAL) are
omitted. It is evident that the expressions puhddu-BA-UR {NU-
UR) are only used with regard to age, and not with regard
to gender — for which latter the expressions US and SAL are
employed.
This statement is corroborated by E. A. H. 56 ; see the notes to
that tablet. According to that tablet the puhddu-BA-UR were
shorn, while the puhddu-NU-UR were not. Th^ puhddu-BA-UR
must therefore have been older than the puhddu-NU-UR. Lambs
when very young ' suck,' but when older they are ' weaned ' and
'give wool.' It is highly probable that puhddu-BA-UR denotes
those lambs which are weaned = Hebr. ?^K3, hence older and thus
' give wool ' ; while the
{d) puhddu-NU-UR signify those lambs which are not {NU)
weaned, i. e. those that ' suck ' = Hebr. p3>. Comp. with this also
Thureau-Dangin, R. A. iii. p. 123, 1. 3.
II. To these lists of cattle belong also the 'goats' and their
'kids,' as is evident from E. A. H. 14, 5, 6. The sign for
'goat' is that given by Amiaud, T. C. No. 31, as ' non
assimile! Later on, however, he identified it with Br. 3707 ; see
Z. A. iii. p. 198 and 210, y. As such it has to be pronounced
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS 347
UZ (Syl> 286) and corresponds to the Assyr. emu, ' a goat '
(H. W. B. p. 99 ; Z. A. iii. 204 ; Gudea F, iv. 5) ; comp. the
Hebr. tjf, pi. D'^V (•/ WV), Aram. H? (Ezra vi. 17); Arab. jl£;
Syr. jxs.-.
12. The 'kid' is represented here by the sign Br. 2030. The
Sumerian pronunciation is not yet known; Hommel, S. L. 64
(/a/?) ; Z. A. iii. 204 ; Delitzsch, A. L '. 49. It is equivalent to the
Assyr. urim = Arab. ,^Js- (iv. R. 26, 20 b; H. W. B. 137), as
well as to laM (H. W. B. 377).
In Sm. 2148, 6, 7, we have UZ-'^x. 2030-^/ explained by ema
it la-la-^a, i. e. 'the goat and its kid' (see Delitzsch, A. W. 196) ;
and comp. with this lah-ra u pu-had-sa (see sub 8). Urisu and
/a/rf then means ' the young goat/ the ' kid.' We transcribe this
sign always by urisu.
The following 'kids' are mentioned in these texts: —
(a) urisu-GAL, R. A. iii. p. 125, 2.
{b) urisu-US, E. A. H. 46, 10.
(c) sal-ahkar, E. A. H. 104, 31.
\d) urisu-^AG-DUG, E. A. H. 14, 6.
(^) urisu-SAG, E. A. H. 15, g.
(a) Urisu-GAL.
If urisu is=lalii, then urisu-GAL would be ' the great kid.' It
seems, however, that urisu is the general expression for ' goat,'
just as UBU is that for ' sheep.' Urisu-GAL then is parallel to
UDU-GAL, and signifies the ' he-goat, buck,' ' Ziegenbock,' ' bouc,'
and corresponds to the Hebrew ^f^ (U-T, ^^^, ^4^) or to the
D^IJ) y^ip (Gen. xxxvii. 31). In all those lists in which this
urisu-GAL is mentioned, a small number only is to be found
in comparison with that of the ' other goats.' So in R. A. iii. 125
only thirty-eight urisu-GAL come upon 450 goats.
{b) Urisu-U^.
The U& (T. C. 7) signifies here, as in puhddu-U^, ' male.'
Urisu- US then would be 'the young he-goat,' Heb. 'Ijl (Uj^^,
348 THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
(c) The ' young she-goat,' however, is not expressed here by
sal-urisu — according to the analogy of SAL-puMdu — but by the
following three signs : SAL-A&-KAR. The signs SAL-A^ in
modern Babylonian script are written together, and pronounced
SU; see Hoinmel, S. L. 419. Comp. also the form for SU
in Gudea B, iv. 18: SIG GiS-SU-AG, i.e. wool that is made
from the young goat. SU (= SAL-A&)-KAR corresponds to
the Assyr. untku (not untku, H. W. B. p. loi ; comp. Arab,
jllc), and undoubtedly means ' a young she-goat.' Comp. iv.
R. 5, col. 3, 32, 33, 34, 35, where SAL-A^-KAR is parallel to
SAL-puMdu :
SIG SAL-A^-KAR U&-NU-ZU SIG SAL-puMdu U&-NU-
ZU ■= ia-rat u-ni-ki la pi-ti-ti sa-rai pu-hat-ti la pi-te-ie.
Just as SAL-puMdu ( = puhattu) signifies the j^^-lamb, so does
SAL-AS-KAR signify the '■young she-goat!
{d) Urisu-^AG-DUG.
The 'kids' thus called follow the urisu-US; see E. A. H. 46,
II ; R. A. iii. 125, 1. 5.
Literally the whole expression means : Kid-heart-good, i. e. 'a
kid of a good (= tendri) heart.' It is highly probable that we
have here the ' kids that suck,' Thureau-Dangin : ' chevreaux a la
mamelle' (R. A. iii. p. 126, 1. 5). If this be true, then ^AG-DVG
here would correspond to the NU-UR, when used oiHas. puhaddti.
Comp. also E. A. H. 14, 6, where the urisu-^AG-DUG follow
immediately upon the UZ.
(e) Urisu-SAG.
The SA G at the first sight suggests the idea of strength or age
(comp. Assyr. dsaridu and re^u) rather than that of gender. Clearly
the idea of ' gender ' must be excluded here, because we have seen
that the young ^«-goats were called urisu-U^, and the young
j^^-goats had the name SAL-A§-£AR. We are therefore
inclined to understand by the urisu-SA G those ' kids ' which are
' weaned.' Hence SA G may be used of the urisu as opposed to
&A G-DUG {= NU-UR). As such it would be = BA-UR, when
used of a puhddu.
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS 349
13. RUG-RUG.
This expression occurs in the E. A. H. tablets in the following
compositions : —
11 udu RUG-RUG-GA IM-MA, E. A. H. 20, rev. 5. The GA
shows that we have to pronounce RUG.
22 udu RUG-RUG IM-MA, E. A. H. 22, rev. 2.
I gud-ga RUG-GA ENGAR, E. A. H. 34, 3.
If we compare with this :
I gud-gfs RUG-GA PA-AL {=iahrii), O. B. I. 126, i. 9 ;
I gud-gts RUG-GA NU-BANDA-GUD, ibid. ii. 7 ;
I aiiiu-ui RUG-GA Ur-'.^'^S''-) Ba-u dup-sar-gud, ibid. iv. 8 j
I gud-I RUG-GA IM-MA UR-E-ninnH-ra (sic), ibid. col. iv.
4th line from end; comp. also col. vi. 18 ;
it will be evident that RUG-RUG-GA, or RUG-RUG, or
RUG-GA signifies a certain class of animals. Interesting is also
the i.^^Z-iVyG'/iV paragraph of O. B. I. 124, rev., col. v. There
we read :
9 SU-NIGIN 15 Hd-al.
10 „ „ 74 gud-gis.
II gud RUG-RUG.
„ „ 5 lid-II-giVtug.-
,> „ 3 gud-II-giUug.
„ 4 lid-II.
15 „ „ 2 gud-II.
„ „ 2 h'd'I.
„ „ 2 gud'I.
„ „ I lid'amar-ga.
„ „ 2 gud-amar-ga.
20 „ „ I gud-'iu-g\.
After these ' cows ' and ' oxen ' the same paragraph enumerates
the ' asses ' as follows ; —
21 ^U-NIGIN 35 anlu.
3 anlu RUG-RUG.
350 THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
&U-NIGIN A^ anHu-td.
3 anIu-id-RUG-RUG.
25 „ ,, 3 anlu-II-gti-tug.
„ „ X+i anlu-ul-II.
„ „ 5 anh-I.
J, ,, 5 anHu-ui-I.
,, „ 7 anlu-amar-ga.
30 „ „ I aniu-us-amar-ga.
„ „ I aniu-iu-gl.
„ „ 2 aniu-uh^lu-gV].
„ „ gub-ba-\a-an\.
Comp. also O. B. I. 126 :
Rev., col. ii.
&U-NIGIN 26 lid-al.
Rev., col. iii.
&U-NIGIN 2 lid-al RVG-GA.
„ I lid-II gii-tug.
„ I lid-Il-gii-tug sag-lid-al-ku.
5o-/a/-2 gud-giL
„ 14 gud-gi^ RUG-GA.
» 5 nu-gud-gii RUG-GA.
„ 4 gud-I RUG-GA sag-gud-gii-tug.
„ 2 gud-gii RUG-GA sag-lid-al-ku.
„ 3 gud-gH sag-lid-al-ku.
10 „ ,, I gud-I sag-gud-gii-ku.
11 ,, „ \ gud-I RUG-GA sag-anlu-ul-ku.
12 „ ,, I gtid-II RUG-GA sag-lid-al-ku.
18 „ „ I anlu-sal RUG-GA.
20 „ „ I anlu-ul-II RUG-GA sag-anlu-sal-ku.
These examples show sufficiently that the expression RUG-
RUG-GA may be applied to oxen, cows, sheep, which may be
either masculine or feminine, great or small, old or young.
Notice {a) that RUG-RUG-{GA) is generally found in the tablets
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS 351
after the mention of more animals than one (the only exception is
O. B. I. 126), thus showing that RUG-RUG-GA is a plural form,
while RUG-GA stands generally when one animal only is referred
to, hence it is the singular; (b) that the expression RUG-GA has
always — excepting in the SU-NIGIN paragraph, which gives
only the 'total' of the animals signified by RUG-GA — either
a 'title' (comp. En-gar, PA-AL, NU-BANDA-GUD) or a
' name ' after it (comp. UM<^'"«''')-Ba-u dup-sar-gud, IM-MA Ur-
E-ninnH-ra). The last example is interesting. O. B. I. 126, iv. 1. 4
from the end, i gud-I RUG-GA IM-MA UR-E-ninnil-ra, can
be translated only : i ox of one year RUG-GA belonging to
{ra = postposition) the IM-MA Ur-E-mnnU. That RA must be
taken here as postposition is proved by O. B. I. 126, vi. 18, where
we have KU. If we compare IM-MA with Engar, Nu-banda-gud,
Pa-al, dup-sar-gud, which expressions are all titles occurring after
RUG-GA, we should be inclined to take IM-MA for a ' title' too,
signifying a certain officer connected in some way or other with the
' herds,' probably a certain class of the shepherds. This may be
corroborated by Br. 8358, where IM-MA has the meaning MMtu,
'lordship' (comp. also Br. 8362, IM=.emilku, which IM however
in this case is pronounced NI; see Syl. "^ 286).
But what does RUG-GA mean in this connection.? The post-
positions RA and KU, which we meet, show clearly that the animals
signified by RUG-GA belong to or are for somebody.
RUG, according to Br. 170, \i.^iru, 'body, flesh,' or Br. 172,
zumru = ' body.' One of these two meanings we would postulate here.
Hence E. A. H. 20, rev. 5, 17, udu RUG-RUG-GA IM-MA,
may be translated : 1 7 sheep, bodies (flesh) belonging to the IM-
MA (an officer). If we remember that in Germany, even up to
the present day, the shepherd of a landlord receives at the yearly
' Zahliag ' one or more sheep, we shall understand why we should
meet here such expressions as ' bodies or body (flesh) belonging to.'
The animals called RUG-GA are thus implied to be the 'income'
of some (kind of) officer or shepherd. Comp. also above, under
ZAL-NI
352' THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
14. Sometimes we also meet the expression NU-ZU in con-
nection with RUG-GA; see E. A. H. . 24, rev. i, LAL-NI 22
RUG-RUG NU-ZU IM-MA, and comp.
I NU-gud RUG-RUG NU-ZU{%\c) Ur-i^'"^''-) KAL dumu {Ga)lu-
(dingir) EN-ZU, R. A. iii. 127, 16 ;
I gud RUG-RUG NU-ZU IM-MA NIN-U-RU{M) PA-AL,
O. B. I. 126, rev. ii. 10.
This ZU\5 sometimes written with the sign for RUG (just as
RUG is sometimes represented by ZU'). ZU, Br. 130 = idii, 'to
know'=Hebr. jJTi, which root is used in Hebrew either of a
' man ' = cognovit vir mulierem, i. e. concubuit cum ea (comp. Gen.
iv. 25: irifN-riK llV Dnx VTI), or of a ' wovQA-a.' = experta est
virum (comp. Gen. xix. ?,:' ^''V. ^VlTih. -\m ni33). The same is
the case with ZU; when used of a female US is prefixed = US
ZU =■ penis ■\- cognoscere ; comp. iv. R. 28, 52 a: SAL-AS-KAR
U&-NU-ZU. In this case U& ZU is = BAR-RUG, and U&-
NU-ZU would be lit. penem + non + cognovit.' When used of a
'male' ZU is used alone. Hence NU-ZU (= non + cognovit) may
be translated here ' undefiled.'
15. Scheil recently published in Z. A. xii. p. 260 fT. some tablets
enumerating cattle. There the UJDU a,nd the puhddu occur in the
following compositions : —
T. C. 2'j2-UDU3.s opposed to T. C. 2'j2-puMdu.
ZU-UBU zs opposed to T. C. 212-UDU.
ZU-puhddu as opposed to T. C. 2^2-puhddu.
From this he concludes that T. C. 272 (see Gudea B, iv. 2) is
={ga)lu-SE {SI) = martl (Br. 6419), ' qui indique la puberty ckez le
mdle'; see also above, p. 344 (a). E. C. 290 takes it as {gd)lu-gunt}.
15. The following proper names (with their titles) occur in these
tablets : —
(Time of Dungi III.)
1 LUGAL-BAR-ZU, E. A. H. 13, rev. 12 {na-gid).
2 {Pa) DUG-GA-ZID-DA,'E. K. H. 13, rev. 14; 14, rev. 9;
15, rev. 8 ; 16, rev. 9,
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS 353
3 NAM-dA-NI,-E. A. H. 14, rev. 8.
4 LU-tl-&AG-GA, 16, rev. 6.
5 LUGAL-KA-GI-NA, 15, rev. 7 («a-^2'rf).
6 UR-^<'insir) PA-SAG, 1 6, rev. 7.
7 f/X-C'V'-'-) NIN-TU, 19, rev. 6 (na-gid).
8 LUGAL-U-KA&-&U-E, 20, rev. 9 (rea-^^a).
9 UR-^-iineir) DUMU-ZI dumu DUG-GA-ZID-DA, 21, rev. 9
10 {GA)LU-^dingiy) NA-RU-A, 22, rev. 6 ((^ay« KU na-gid).
11 (G!^)ZZ7-^.^-[7V7], 23, 10.
12 LUGAL-^l-GAR-E dumu &AG-DA, 23, rev. 6 {^na-gid).
13 LUGAL-EZEN [= ^arru-ikrub ?), 23, rev. 7 («z-&).
14 LUGAL-KA-KI-NA, 24, rev. 5 (/a-[a/] dagal-^e).
(Time of Bur-Sin II.)
15 {GA)LU-DINGIR-RA {=Amel-ili), 28, rev. 6.
16 ^-Z^ {?)-URU, 29, rev. 4.
17 UR-&ID, 29, rev. 8 ab (Br. 3819, H. W. B. 140).
18 UR-GU-LA dumu [A-i]u, 30, 5 {na-gtd).
19 UR-&AG-GA dumu {GA)LU-f.'''»sir) NA-RU-A, 31, rev. 8.
20 AB, 35, 8 {ni-ku); 36, 8; 37, 8; 38, 9.
21 UR-GU-LA, -ii,^ (ni-ku); 36, 9; 37, 10; 38, 10.
22 {GA)LU-ME-NE {= melammt), 35, rev. 6 ; 40, rev. 9 {na-gid f).
23 Lud-DJ-NE, 36, rev. 9.
24 LUGAL-EZEn\= ^arru-ikrub f), 37, rev. 9.
25 NAM-MA^, 38, rev. 7.
26 A-DA, 39, rev. 8 {na-gid).
27 &tr-E{?)-A-NI-&A, 40, rev. 10 {na-gid).
28 LA-NI-MU, 41, rev. 10 {na-gid).
29 UR-^'''"!^''') KAL (= Kalbi-Lamassu) dumu AMAR-P-a, 42,
R. 7.
30 -iVCW, E. A. H. 43, rev. 8.
31 [iV7iV]-G!/^-Z/-Z>Z'(sic)-^, 44, rev. 9.
32 LUGAL-ME-NE {= melammi), 45, rev. 10.
33 We-(*»i-'>-) IM {■=Kalbi-Rammdnu\ 46, rev. 4.
A a
354
THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
Among the cities' mentioned in these tablets are to be found :—
Ki-nu-nir-''' — Borsippa.
Gir-su^' = a part of Shirpurla (Telloh).
Tik-ab-ba-k'\
Nt'nd-''' = a part of Shirpurla (Telloh).
TIT
9
lO
II
m
E. A. H. 14.
Obverse.
^»"
^^
4^.
[g-g^'T
m fe/<W M^ K'^o
^ET
t
&um t^,^
Reverse.
W
AS
iv^:
^ ^Tft "^"^
s-j
TT p
a
1 The cities are always introduced by SaG = (ina) libbi = in (the midst
of). In E. A. H. 31, rev. 9, we have SAG-Nind-ki-Vz. = in the midst of {kii)
NindM. Sometimes we also find : SaG . . . g&l-lora-an, E. A. H. 54.
" Pronunciation is hypothetical. May also be read: Gu-ab-ba->" (=' sea-
side '). The situation of this city is not yet known. See, however, iv. R^ 31,
No. 1, col. ii. 12, where it is mentioned before DIN-TIR-hi.
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS
355
43 ganam
43 udu-ui
7 sal-puhddu
7 puhddu-ui
5 3 ««
I «r2>« lag-dug
mu-gub
ganam udu-ui
zig-ga
10 6 ganam 17 tidu-ui
puhddu
rig-rig-ga
E. A. H. 14.
Obverse.
43 ewes
43 ' mature ' sheep
7 she-lambs
7 he-lambs
3 she-goats
I sucking kid
were present
ewes mature sheep
expended
6 ewes 17 mature sheep
lambs
snatched away
Reverse.
ganam i udu-ui
puhddu
lal-ni-a-an
lu-nigin lO'^ gub-ba
5 lu-nigin zig-ga
lu-nigin 23 rig-rig-ga
lu-nigin i lal-ni
Nam-^a-ni
Pa Dug-ga-zid-da
10 lag Gir-su-^'
Mu-ul-sa Ki-mal-''' ba-^ul
ewes I mature sheep
lambs
lal-ni-a-an (were lost)
Total : 103 present
Total : expended
Total : 23 snatched away
Total : I lal-ni (lost)
Nam^ani (shepherd)
Overseer: Duggazidda
Girsu
One year after (the king) devas-
tated Kimash.
356
THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
E. A. H. 19.
Obverse.
8
9
10
II
^H"
T
■ <?~jM -
'W^^
Reverse.
i|r>-«TT
T'^
ir^r
a^n fe^^
^TT
^§g^
m^ ^"^ ^K
^^f^"^ "#
^^.$3Xl^.#^T^
9 ■^>^^ 7T ^
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS
.357
E. A. H. 19.
Obverse.
1 2 ganam
udu-gal
2 udu-ui
3 puhddu-ba-ur sag-ganam-
5 6 puhddu-nu-ur
I unsu-sag
8 puMdu-ha-ur sag-udu-us-
ku
mu-gub "
ganam i udu-ui
10 z?^-^a
LABAR-a-an
12 ewes
rams
2 mature sheep
3 weaned lambs exchanged for
ewes
6 sucking lambs
I weaned kid
8 weaned lambs exchanged for
mature sheep
were present
ewes I mature sheep
expended
Reverse.
lal-ni 2 2 udu rug-rug im-ma Lost were 2 2 sheep, income of the
lal-ni-a-an
iu-nigin 3 2 guh-ba
su-nigin 1 zig-ga
su-nigin 22 lal-ni
Ur-^ingir) ISfin-tu na-gid
sag Tik-ab-ba-'''
Mu-us-sa Ki-mds-^'
mu-us-sa-a-bi
Im-ma
Total: 32 present
Total: I expended
Total : 2 2 lost
Ur-Nintu, shepherd
Tikabba
Two years after (the king) devas-
tated Kimash.
358
THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
E. A. H. 35.
Obverse.
6
1
8
9
10
nr T M
#Tnr !^
X.
IT >¥-^ ^K
-7^
'wr
^^m
x<mm<tmm
Reverse.
a:w ^y 4^r
TTT
yy ^^>^ffcT^b>
F^~^R^
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS
359
i6g ganam
i8i udu-ui
43 sal-puhddu
60 puhddu-ui
2 urisu-sag
mu-gub
E. A. H. 35.
Obverse.
169 ewes
181 mature shefep
43 she-lambs
60 he-Iambs
2 weaned kids
were present
10 ganam 8 udu-u^ i puhddu 10 ewes 8 mature sheep i lamb
Ab ni-ku
2 puhddu-us Ur-Gu-la ni-ku
10 zig-ga
73 ganam 1 1 udu-us
Ab, the chief overseer
2 he-lambs Ut-Gula, the chief
overseer
took away
73 ewes II mature sheep
Reverse.
3 put}ddu
rig-rig-ga
lu-nigin 455 gub-ba
lu-nigin 21 zig-ga
lu-nigin 87 rig-rig-ga
{Ga)lu-me-ne (Jam)
lag Tik-ab-ba-'^
mu (''") Bur-^"») Sin lugal-e
Ur-bil-lum-^' mu-^ul
3 lambs
were ravished
Total : 455 present
Total : 2 1 taken away
Total : 87 ravished
(Ga)lumene {latn)
Tikabba
In the year when king Bur-Sin(II.]
devastated Urbillum.
360
THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
E. A. H. 37.
Obverse.
" Reverse.
5
6
7
8
9
to
^ t^^
1S^0^^^^^
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS
361
E. A. H. 37.
Obverse.
44 ganam
22 udu-ui
9 sal-puhddu
la puhddu-ui
5 I urisu-sag
mu-gtib
2 ganam 2 udu-us
Ah ni-ku
5 udu-tis lal-ni rug-ga
udu-us-ku
10 Ur-Gu-la ni-ku
sag-
44 ewes
22 mature sheep
9 she-lambs
10 he-lambs
1 weaned kid
were present
2 ewes 2 mature sheep
Ab, the chief overseer
5 he-lambs, remainder of the in-
come, exchanged for the mature
sheep
Ur-Gula, the chief overseer
Reverse.
zig-ga
6 ganam 9 udu-ui 3 puhddu
rig-rig-ga
lal-ni I udu-us
iu-nigin 86 gub-ba
^u-nigin 9 zig-ga
iu-nigin 18 rig-rig-ga
lu-nigin i lal-ni
Lugal-ezen
lag Tik-ab-ba-ki
Mu i*'") £ur-^'^") Sin lugal-e
Ur-bil-lum-''' gul
has taken away
6 ewes 9 mature sheep 3 lambs
were ravished
Loss : I mature sheep
Total : 86 present
Total : 9 taken away
Total : 1 8 ravished
Total : I lost
Lugalezen
Tikabba
In the year when kingBur-Sin(II.)
devastated Urbillum.
362
THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
To the preceding tablets belongs also E. A. H. 104. The
understanding of this tablet depends on the KU in line- 27, which
carries its force also to 11. 12, 20, 22, and 24; hence we have to
supply before those lines an 'ana', i.e. 'to,' 'for.' A verb is not
expressed. The postposition KU, however, demands some such
word as ' naddnu,' ' to give.' Thus, then, this tablet states the in-
come (NIN-SID, cp. epus nihasi) of the following five (5 NIN-
SID-td) temples or persons : —
(a) the temple of Dungi, 1. 12.
\h) Ur-Ba'u of the Mtlahri, 1. 20.
(c) the shdbrfi of Ningirsu, 1. 22.
(d') the temple of Ba'u, 1. 24.
\e) Munabagag {=Sumi-iu-mudammik), 1. 27.
E. A. H. 104. Obverse.
w m
^
T g-^^^^"^ -
T ^^ff^-f^^
M i^
^
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS
363
E. A. H. 104.
Obverse.
6 udu I urisu
Lugal-dib-bu
Sag-tu
I urisu {Ga)lu-gin-na
5 I {udu) Sa-al-ni-ni
I {udu) Lugal-pa-ud-du
I {udu) CV-C*"^'*-) Utu
I {udu) (G!a)/«-(*>«'i'-) Ba-u
I urisu {Gd)lu-Bal-lag-ga
10 I urisu i7r-(*»^''") KAL
dumu {Gd)lu-dingir-ra
II a(/a 3 urisu
E.[,diHgir) Bun-gi
I {Gudu) ar {?)-ra-ah-du
I («(/a) Ur-Nigin-gar
15 I (arf«) Ur-lid
I («(/«) Ad-da-mu
5 «(/« I «m«
10-lal-i udu I «m«
20 Ur-^<i<«eir') Ba-u e-pa-al
6 sheep i kid
from Lugaldibbu
1 (sheep) from the Sagtu
I kid from Am61ukfn
I (sheep) from Balnini {=Bdl-ili)
„ „ Lugalpauddu
Ur-Utu (= Kalbi-
Shamash)
,, „ from Am^l-Ba'u
I kid from (Ga)lu-Balshagga
„ „ Kalbi-Lamassu, the
son of Am61-ili
(Total) II sheep 3 kids (should
be 4 kids !)
for the temple of Dungi
I (sheep) from Harrabdu
Ur-Nigingar
Urshid
„ „ Addamu
5 sheep I kid
from the Sagtu
(Total) 9 sheep i kid
for Ur-Ba'u of the bit-Ubri
3. SAG-TU h the name of an officer; comp. Rec. Trav. xix. p. 51, 10:
Lugaluru-da SAG-TU dumu A-ai-da SAG-TU.
13. The first sign is not clear; it may also be LID (Br. 8983), or SIR
(Horn. S. L. 301).
14. The sign NIGIN is that of Br. 9251. Nigin-gar here no doubt is a
god, and probably the same as that mentioned in ii. R. 60, 13 a: idingir)
PAP {KUR)-NIGIN-GAR-RA Urru U UD- UNUG {=Larsa) ki. Accord-
ing to ii. R. 57, 57 c, he is = (»Vw) Nin-ib.
ao. PAAL is the Assyr. idbrii, an oiificer ; comp. S'. 217 ; H. W. B. p. 639.
364
THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
E. A. H. 104.
Reverse.
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS
365
E. A. H. 104.
Reverse.
2 udu 2 urisu
Pa-al ('''»^<>) Nin-gir-su
3 udu 10 urisu
E-Ba-M
25 I urisu d7r-(*»>r'>-) KAL
dumu A-iu
I Wm Ur-^^i^eir) Al-la
Mu-na-ia-lag-ku
lu-nigin 3 ganam
lu-nigin i sal-pu^ddu
30 iu-nigin 22 «</«
Hu-nigin 2 sal-ahkar
iu-nigin 16 urisu-us
zwa^^ «z-^«
[//« .<4«ar-a-]a-j/'
35 [i^K ffd]-ar-h->'* ffu-mur-
tiM la-^ul
5 Nin-lid-ia
2 sheep 2 kids
for the sh^brfl of Ningirsu
3 sheep 10 kids
for the house of Ba'u
I kid from Kalbi-Lamassu the son
of Atu
I sheep from Ur-AUa
for Munabashag
Total : 3 ewes
Total : I ewe-lamb
Total : 22 sheep
Total ; 2 young she-goats
Total : 16 young he-goats
.... -ma^ the chief overseer
In the month of Amarasi
In the year when (the king) de-
vastated Harshi and Humurti
Five incomes (revenues).
34. E-Ba-bi = E-Ba-vi = E-Ba-i, which latter is the gen. of Ba'u, i. e.
' for the house (temple) of Ba'u.'
28. The SU-NIG/N'-paTagia.ph is remarkable. It shows that UDU ou one
o
hand means fa//& (|XS) ; on the other, 'sheep' (= Arab. ^G; comp. i Sam.
XXV. 3), in contradistinction to goat ; for in the body of the tablet only UD U are
mentioned ( = |i^if), which again are divided into ganam, sal-pu^ddu, and
a
U£>U(, = sheep as such, .jG). The numerals are not clear on the tablet, but
3 + 1 + 23 = 36 udu = II (1. II) + 9 (1. 19) +2 (1. 21) + 3 (1. 23) + ! (1. 26) =
26 «t/».
36. The first sign is not clear, but it must be the numeral 5. The TA pro-
bably is only an abbreviation of TA-A-AN. For NIN-SID see above,
PP- 253, 337, I-
366 THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
E. A. H. 33, 34,121.
These tablets are similar to those of the UDU, sheep. They
are accounts of the herds composed out of ' asses ' {aniu), ' cows '
{lid), and ' oxen ' (gud), and state how many were present (gub-
ba-a-an), how many were 'taken away' {zig~ga, E. A, H. 121, 20,
30), or were LAL-NI (E. A. H. ibid. ^ 31, 43), or 'are dead'
(ba-til,'E. A. H. ibid. 21).
The general expression for ' cow ' is LID. That this sign (Br.
8866) had already at the time of Ur-NinS the syllabic value LID
is evident from the name of the eldest son of Ur-NinS, who is
called LID-DA (Ddc. pi. ii, ^% No. i.). We are justified therefore
in reading this sign=Z/Z), and not AB (Jensen, K. B. iii '- 58, to
Gudea F, iii. 16). AB, Syl. *> 254 = Assyr. arhu, H. W. B. 132 ;
LID= Assyr. littu, ' cow,' which is the fem. oiM (Arab. is^\ ' ox,'
' bull,' H. W. B. 364 ; comp. Hebr. HN^, Arab. h. ' Ox ' is GUD
= Assyr. M [or alpii\ (Br. 5739, 5737). LID and GUD then
would correspond to the Hebrew^ iT]S (i Sam. vi. 7 ff.) and "la
respectively. The LID always precedes the GUD.
The sign for ' ass ' = Br. 4984 ; see Z. A. iii. 205. Sum. =
aniu; K%5yT. = tmeru (H. W. B. 91); Hebr. liDrj. When the
sign for ariiu is used alone, it always signifies the she-ass = Assyr.
atdnu (H. W. B. 158), Hebr. tins, Js\, Ul?' Comp. E. A. H.
33, 1. I, ariiu, as being opposed to aniu-ui ; 1. 3, aniu-II, with
1. 4, aniu-uhll. In O. B. I. 124, on the other hand, ansu is never
found alone, but has either SAL or US after it ; comp. ibid,
col. iv. I ff. Hence an^u-US=im(ru-='f\'Or\^ while aniu or anlu-sal
= eidnu, |inK, the ' she-ass.'
The following LID, GUD, and AN^U mny occur :—
' The Hebrew tpK is gen. comm. embracing both LID and GUD.
OF BABYLONIAN ClAY-TABLETS
367
LID
(a) lid-AL
{a),lid-AL-{RUG-
GA)
4. lid.{RUGGA)
5. lidll GI&-TUG
6. lid-II
7-
8. Kd-I
9-
10. lid-amar-ga
11. Hd-'iu-gi
II.
G£/Zi
AN&V
ib) gud- GiS (c), anU-{sal)
{l>)gud-G/S- . ansu-{sa[){RUG-
{RUG-GA) GA)
NU-g-ud-GlS-
{RUG-GA)
gud-{RUG-GA)
NU-GUD\RUG-
GA) (see under 3)
gud-II ( Gli- TUG) anU-n Glh- TUG
gud-ll
gud-II {RUG-GA)
gud'J aniu-{sal)-I
gud-I {RUG-GA)
gud-amar'ga an'iu-{sal)amar-ga
gud-Hu-gi aniu-tu-gfi
ansu-amar-NA
{d) aniu-VS
aniu-uhiRUG-GA)
aiiiu-ui-II
aniu-ui-II{RUG-
GA)
aniu-ui-I
an}u-ulS-amafr-ga
anlSu-uhiu-gi
This arrangement is based chiefly upon the &U-NIGIN para-
graph in O. B. I. 124, rev. col. v., supplemented by that of
O. B. I. 126, rev. col. ii. fol., and the above-mentioned tablets of
the E. A. H. collection.
I. LID-AL; GUB-GI^; AN$U-{SAL); AN&U-U&. As
regards, the meaning of US as opposed to SAL in Q. B. I. 126,
rev. iv. 14, it is evident that the former {US) can only mean =
zikaru, ' male.' As such it is like the US occurring in connection
with fyuMdu (not = that which is found after UDU). AN$U-U&
then would be the 'he-ass,' AN&U-{SAL) the 'she-ass.' And
because these two always head the lists of the asses, which lists
generally are concluded with the AN&U-AMAR-GA (= sucking
asses, see there), we may rightly suppose that these two expressions
signify the ' full-grown ' asses, the he- and she-asses, kot ifyix^"-
As such they would correspond to the LID-AL and the GUD-
Glh. The meaning of the AL is not yet certain. The LID-AL,
however, head the lists of the LID, as do the GUD-GI& those
of the GUD, both of which lists are again concluded by the LID-
368 THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
AMAR-GA and the GUD-AMAR-GA respectively. GI^ may
mean edlu, zikaru, rabU, Br. 5702, 5707, 5704, suggesting at
once the idea of ' strength.' AL, being parallel to GIS, undoubtedly
has a similar meaning. LID-AL then is=litiu rabttu, GUD-GIS
=the M rabU, the ' great ' (i. e. ' full-grown ') cow, the ' great ' (i. e.
'full-grown') bull. That AL must have here some such meaning
is evident from E. A. H. 135, 2 (unpublished), where we find the
LID-GAL {=raba) preceding those called LID MU-IV.
2. LID-AL-RUG-GA (O. B. I. 126, rev. iii. i); GUD-
GlS RUG-GA, AN^U-{SAL) RUG-GA, AN^U-U& RUG-GA.
The RUG-GA clearly indicates — because found behind cows and
bulls as well as behind he- and she-asses — a certain quality common
to all animals. We have seen that it is also to be found after the
' sheep,' and this irrespective of age; comp. No. 7, gud-II RUG-
GA; No. 9, gud-I RUG-GA. RUG-GA alone occurs only in
the ^Z7-iV7(j/7V paragraph, while in the body of the tablet this
expression is always followed by the signs for ENGAR or NU-
BANDA or PA-AL, or even proper names (see above, under
RUG-GA, p. 349 ff.). The RUG-GA, then, signifies here as well
as there the bodies (the flesh = meat) belonging to somebody, the
' income.'
3. NU-GUD-GI&, or also NU-GUD (R. A. iii. 127, 16). In
O. B. I. 126, iii. 6, this animal is mentioned immediately after the
GUD-GI& (1- 4) and followed by the GUD-L In O. B. I. 126,
no GUD-II are mentioned; if they were, the NU-GUD-GI^
would no doubt have been placed between the GUD-GI^ and the
GUD-II. The literal translation of these signs would be : Not-
bull. It is hardly probable that the NU negates the GI& ; if this
were the case we would expect GUD-NU-GI&, i. e. a bull which
is not GI&, ' full-grown.' Besides this, the expression would be
too general, for every GUD that is not GI^ is NU-GI^, ' not
full-grown ' ; hence it might be applied to all GUD, whether they
be one or two years old. No, the NU negatives the GUD or M,
for we have also the expression NU-GUD. LH is the masc. of
littu and means 'bull.' A NU-GUD then would be an 'ox,' in
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS 369
contradistinction to bull, and a NU-GUD-GI& is a ' full-grown
ox.' As such he is RUG-GA, i. e. the income of a shepherd
(O. B. I. 126, iii. 6; comp. also R. A. iii. 127, 16). In this latter
place the NU-GUD RUG-RUG is followed by NU-ZU, and as
such he belongs to UrM'ns'A KAL dumu (G^)ZC/-(*'»^'»') EN-
ZU. NU-ZU, it was maintained (see above, p. 352), \&.= notir
cognovit, sc. any LID. The NU-GUD NU-ZU then mentioned
here would be an ' ox ' which never (NU), even when he was not
yet a NU-GUD, did ZU, i. e. an undefiled ox.
4. LID; GUD.
LID and GUD, when used alone, signify the 'cow' and the
'bull' in general. As such they precede the LID-II and the
GUD-II. A calf or young bull came to be signified by LID
and GUD when they were three years old ; hence they are placed
after the LID-AL and the GUD-GI&, which latter must have
reached the age of four years, if they deserved to be called AL or
GIS respectively.
5. LID-II GiS-TUG (written KU) ; GUD-II GIS-TUG ;
AN&U-II GI&-TUG.
The expre'ssion. GiS-TUG, as is evident from these examples,
must be a ^«««rrt/ expression, applicable to cows, bulls, she-asses
(and by analogy also to he-asses), to male and female. So far
I have found this expression only after the numeral II, which indi-
cates the age of the ^nimal according to years, standing as such for
MU-II{see E. A. H.435, 2 ff., lid-MU-IV, lid-MU-III, &c.; and
E. A. H. 121, 40, anlu-ul RUG-RUG NU-ZU MU-III). These
GIS-TUG animals are enumerated between the LID, GUD and the
LID-II, GUD-II. The force of this expression is not yet clear to
me. Has it anything to do with the lime when these animals either
want ' to cover ' or ' be covered ' ? Their being mentioned between
the LID, GUD and LID-II, GUD-II, Sec, would make this idea;
probable.
6-8. Animals followed by a number.
This number indicates, as has already been said under (5),
B b
370 THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
the years, standing for MU-II or MU-I. A Lid-II would be
a * heifer,' a Hd-I & 'calf of one year, &c., &c.
10. LID-AMAR'GA ; GUD-AMAR-GA ; AN&U-{SAL)-
AMAR-GA; AN&U-U^-AMAR-GA.
GA, Br. 6114, hzbu, H. W. B. 649, ' milk' ; or Br. 61 15 : tulii,
H. W. B. 707. AMAR, Br. 9098 = bUru, H. W. B. 169, 'the
young one' (of animals and men). What ptecedes AMAR is
determinative, indicating what kind of AMAR it is, whether it
belongs to the cows {lid), bulls {gud), she-asses {ANSl/-{SAL)),
or he-asses {AN&U-U&). LID-AMAR-GA, lit. translated cow-
young-(of) milk, i. e. bilru sa eli tu-lu-u, which still ' sucks.' The
expression AMAR-GA then would correspond to the urisu-SAG-
DUG or to puMdu-NU- UR.
In the NIGIN-BA paragraph (lit. its {ba) grand total) of O. B. I.
126, rev, vi., the LID-AMAR-GA and GUD-AMAR-GA are
comprised under the title AMAR-GUD-SUN, i. e. biirS la alpi
{gud = alpu, as such comprising also the LID), and the ANSU-
{^AL)-AMAR-GA and AN^U-U^-AMAR-GA are mentioned
as AMAR-AN&U-SVN, i. e. bUri la imtrl
11. Very often occur also the so'called LID-^U-GI, GUD-
iU-GI, AN^U-&U~Gi, AN-iU-U&-&U-GL Whenever these
animals are mentioned, they follow the AMAR-GA.
Gl here=Br. 6307. In these old texts G1 stands very often for
G/(Br. 2385). lu-GI, Br. 7129 = Mbu, H. W. B. 652, -grau
sein ' Oder ' werden' ' alt, greis sein! Comp. also iU-GI= Ubu, Br.
ibid., H. W. B. ibid.
The animals thus signified then would be the 'old' animals.
Thureau-Dangin, ' hors d'dge' ; see R. A. iii. p. 130, 1. 9.
12. In O. B. I. 124 also occur the so-called AMAR-AN&U-
NA-A (iii. 25; V. 20) or AN^U-AMAR-NA-A (iv. 4).
NA = T. C. 26i=zBr. 8990, irlu, 'bed' ; 8997, rabdsu, H. W. B.
610 {utaiu, H. W. B. 158 and 438 sub biii), ' to lie down.' The
young asses thus called are those that ' lie down in the yard,' either
on account of sickness (comp. also KI-NA = taplahu) or because
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS 371
they are still too young to join the herd. Comp. also O. B. 1. 124,
rev. iv., last line, where we seem to have \_AMAR-AN&[f\-A-NA.
13. In the enumeration of these cattle we not only hear of
certain animals as being exchanged [SAG-KU) for others, but
also as being AZAG-TA-^AM. Comp. O. B. I. 124, i. 17,
I anU AZAG-TA-&AM; ibid. ii. 11, i gud AZAG-TA-&AM.
For this expression, see Br. 9903, Itmatu, and A. B. P. R. p. 126,
' das durch Kauf erworbene Besiizium' lit. ' a thing paid for with
money.'
After these introductory remarks it will suffice to give a tran-
scription and translation, as far as possible, of the above-mentioned
tablets.
372
THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
E. A, H. 33.
Obverse.
y^f^ A ^
^^^m:^>'|ft
n.f^^^f^ :^^
t^^
^
I
2 .
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
IS
16
17
18
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS
373
10
15
E.
A. H. 33.
Obverse.
2 atiiu 3 ansu-ul
2 she-asses 3 he-asses
I aniu sag-anlu-tii-ku
I she-ass exchanged for a he-ass
I aniu-Il
I she-ass of 2 years
1 anlu-uk-II
I he-ass of 2 years
I a«^«-«^ RUG-GA EN-
I he-ass the income of the shep-
GAR
herd
guh-ha-a-an
are present
lal-ni I aniu-II
Minus I she-ass of 2 years
{Ga)lu-<~'^'«i^'^ Na-ru-a
(Ga)lu-Narua (shepherd)
2 lid-al 3 gud-gii
2 great cows 3 great bulls
I lid-II gis-itig
I cow of 2 years GIS-TUG
I /z-(f-/
I cow of I year
I ^«</-^2? RUG-GA EN-
I great bull the income of the
GAR
shepherd
guh-ha-a-an
are present
Ba-zig-gi
Baziggi (shepherd)
5 gud-gU
5 great bulls
I gud-iu-gl
I old bull
guh-ha-a-an
are present
Uru-kal-la
Urukalla (shepherd)
Leftside; '
Ad-da
Adda.
374
THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
E. A. H. 33.
Reverse.
19
20
21
22
24
25
26
27
28
29
1^ §^^^ PPPP g^=f4T
;fe^^.
rF^^
FlfY^ ^"
^ ^i^ ^^
3^^^M
^^;^^^f
30
^.
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS
375
Reverse.
19 I aniu 4 ansu-us
20 I aniu-uhll gii-iug
I anlu-I
I anlu-I sag-ansu-ku MIT-
IN-RUG KA-PI-GAR-
MA BA-A-TIL-KU
I amu-u'i RUG-GA EN-
GAR
I anU RUG-GA ENGAR
25 gub-ba-a-an
A-a-ud-bu-ku
Pa Ad-da
gud-engar-gub-ba
(dingir) Nin-Mar^'-ka
30 Mu-ui-sa ('■'«) Bur-('l'^) Sin
lugal
I she-ass 4 he-asses
I he-ass of 2 years GI^-TUG
I she-ass of i year
I she-ass of i year exchanged for
a she-ass . . .
I he-ass the income of the shep-
herd
I she-ass the income of the shep-
herd
are present
Aaudbukia (shepherd)
Overseer: Adda
Oxen employed for the tilling of
the ground belonging
to Nin-Mar-^'
Oneyearafter Bur-Sin(II.) became
king.
3 2. The signs of this line are so crowded that it is very difficult to dis-
tinguish one from the other.
The signs for MU-IN-RUG, however, are clear. The sign for RUG
sometimes also stands for ZU (and vice versa). Have we perhaps to
read MU-IN-ZU [ZU = 5)1*), and to translate, ' i she-ass of one year
exchanged for a she-ass that has been covered ' ? The next four signs
probably stand for a proper name. PI is not clear ; it might also be SI.
The two signs read above BA-A (= two strokes) might also be read LUG.
For TIL-KU, comp. Br. 1577 : TIL-KU-DA = nttu, H. W. B. 460 :
' Zuriickhaltung, Hemmung: Probably we have to read here LUG-BE-
ZID, and see in this a certain office, that of a shepherd. The whole
line then might be translated : ' i she-ass of one year exchanged for a she-ass
that has been covered, belonging to KA-PI-GAR-MA, the LUG-BE-ZID
( = servant of the pasture) ? ' Comp. with this the parallel passage in E, A. H.
34, 22, in which line the signs are just as crowded as here.
27. For PA, see under ' officials,' p. 411 («) S.
28. See p. 334, I (<r).
376
THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
E. A. H. 34.
Obverse.
V
ISW
^, .1:3
r
T
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS
377
E. A. H. 34.
Obverse.
2 lid-al 3 gud-gii
2 gud-amar-ga
I gud-gi^ RUG-GA EN-
GAR sag-Kd-al-ku
I gud-I RUG-GA ENGAR
5 gub'ba-a-an
{Ga)lu-(^'«^'*-) Gti-bar-ud-du
4 gud-gis
1 gud-gii RUG'GA EN-
GAR
guh-ba-a-an
10 UM^i''ei'') Ka-di
5 aniu I ansu-us
2 anlu-I sag-aiisu-ui-I-ku
I anHu-uH amar-ga-I
I ansu-us su-gl
151 (7«Jf« sag-atiiu-ul-ku
I a«& RUG-GA ENGAR
sag-anlu-u^-I-ku
gub-ba-a-an
2 great cows 3 great bulls
2 bulls that suck
I great bull the income of the
shepherd exchanged for a great
cow
1 bull of I year the income of the
shepherd
are present
(Ga)Iu-Gishbaruddu (shepherd)
4 great bulls
r great bull the income of the
shepherd
are present
Ur-Kadi (shepherd)
5 she-asses i he-ass
2 she-asses of i year exchanged
for a he-ass of i year
I he-ass that sucks, i year old
I old he-ass
I she-ass exchanged for a he-ass
I she-ass the income of the shep-
herd exchanged for a he-ass of
I year
are present
30 Lugal-engar
Left side.
Royal shepherd.
378
THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
E. A. H. 34.
Reverse.
19
20
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
E^
DP
p
m-
■a-timwtiaf^f*^'''^'' •*"''
/^^
^
^^^
^^^^^
^
^^^ te^^Y ^^ '
^MAm'^^\
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS
379
1 8 {Ga)lu-(^'''/^''-) Nin-sun
1 lid-al 2 gud-gis
20 1 gud-amar-ga
2 gud-gu RUG-GA EN-
GAR
I gud-gii RUG-GA EN-
GAR tm-banda-gud it
dup-sar gud-I^ sag-gud-
Il-ku
gub-ba-a-an
Ur-Gaf
25 PA lugal-engar
gud-engar-gub-ba
(dingtr) Nm-Mar-^'-ka
PA-SANGA ^''•"Jrir) Nin-
Mar-^'
Mu-tts-sa ('■'«) Bur-(.''«) Sin
lugal
Reverse.
(Ga)lu-Ninsun (shepherd)
I great cow 2 great bulls
1 bull that sucks
2 great bulls the income of the
shepherd
I great bull the income of the
chief shepherd and scribe, of
the oxen that are i year old
instead of the oxen that are 2
years old
are present
Ur-Gar (shepherd)
overseer of the royal shepherds
Oxen employed for the tilling of
the ground belonging to
Nin-Mar-^'
high-priest of Nin-Mar-^'
One year after
became king.
Bur-Sin (II.)
' Comp. R. A. iii. p. 139; 1 anU-u'i RUG-GA dup-sar gud-X; ' I &m
Rug-ga du bowoier-scribe {chef) de 10 bceufs'
38o
THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
E. A. H. 121.
Obverse.
ir^^^^2^
i;:^^
'W^J^
iT^r
a^Jtf ^fe=- A^xy
D
^^
yf^
PDD
r'^Ti^W^^
g:^^ TT ^^
r
4
5
6
V
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
17
18
20
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS
381
E. A.H. 121.
Obverse.
aniu she-asses
3 anSu-ui 3 he-asses
I atiiu-td RUG-GA engar-I i he-ass the income of the shep-
sag-anlu-II-ku
herd, i year old, exchanged for
a she-ass of 2 years
I aniu-amar-ga
I she-ass that sucks
5 gub-ba-a-an
are present
(dingir) Utu-MUengar
Utu-MU (Shamashiddin), shep-
herd
I aniu
I she-ass
7 anlu-uk
7 he-asses
I anU-u^-II RUG-GA engat
• I he-ass of 2 years the income of
the shepherd
10 gub-ba-a-an
are present
Ur-^<ii«gir) KAL engar
Kalbi-Lamassu, shepherd
3 lid-al
3 great cows
I gud-gii
I great bull
I gud-II gii-tug
I bull of 2 years GI&-TUG
15 I lid-amar-ga
I calf that sucks
I a«^M RVG-GA nu-banda-
1 she-ass the income of the chief
gud sag-gud-gis-ku
shepherd, exchanged for a great
bull
I gud-I RUG-RUG engar
I bull of one year the income of
the shepherd
gub-ba-a-an
are present
I gud-gU Na-da-tum
I great bull Nadatum (see p.
337. A
20 ««jf-^a
has taken away
Left side.
45 [Ur-^'^'^S'*') Nin-gyi-zid-da [Ur-Ning]ishzidda
Ur-E-ninnll and Ur-Eninnft
^al the Gal.
382
THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
E. A. H. 121.
Reverse.
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
yr_ £:rt i^_ ^ y ^^ K I
v^;^ W:^ #^
p ^ C^
m
m
TT>>J^
^^^^g^
>^
T^
g— ^r
T>DPD
>>^=T
DD
m^F- ^^^ m
^jj^^ TT
I?
^^^
#
^ g;
wi
if^^
^^
m f
^a
^^^TTT
OF BABYWNIAN CLAY-TABLETS
383
212 Ab-ba engar ba-til
Reverse.
2 belonging to Abba the shepherd
are dead
2 lid-al 2 great cows
2 gud-gtl 2 great bulls
I gud'II gii-tug I bull of two years GI&-TUG
25 \ lid-al sag-gud-gii-ku RUG- i great cow, exchanged for a great
GA engar bull the income of the shepherd
I gud-gii RUG-GA engar i great bull the income of the
shepherd
I bull that sucks
are present
I old great cow
I gud-aniar-ga
gub-ba-a-an
I lid-al iu-gl
30 zig-ga
lal-ni I gud-I
Bar-ru engar
4 aniu
1 anHu-ui
35 1 av&u-ui-I I gii-tug
2 aniu-uhll
I aniu RUG-GA nu-banda-
gud
I anlu-us RUG-GA nu-
banda-gud
I anlu RUG-GA engar
40 I anlu-ui RUG-RUG NU-
ZU mu-III (Ga)lu-zi-lum '
gub-ba-a-an
[lal-ny 1 anlu-II
-gi engar
PA Ur-Gar
is taken away
minus i bull of one year
Barru, shepherd
4 she-asses
I he-ass
1 he-ass of two years GJ&-TUG
2 he-asses of two years
I she-ass the income of the chief
shepherd
I he-ass the income of the chief
shepherd
I she-ass the income of the shepherd
I he-ass, an income, never having
covered, three years old, belong-
ing to (Ga)luzilum
are present
minus i she-ass of two years
-gi, shepherd
Overseer : Ur-Gar
' For this name see also R. A. iii. p. 13s : SAG-GAL aniu ZI-LUM,
' food for the asses ZI-LUM^ and ibid. p. 139, 1. 14.
384 THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
E. A. H. 47, 48, 49, 122.
These tablets are accounts of wool (SIG). It is no -wonder that
the people at this time were very particular in keeping account
of their sheep — how many of them were present, and thus were
able to yield a certain measure of wool, and how niany were
absent, thus a clear loss to the owners of the herds. The people
were chiefly shepherds. Among other things, wool was the most
favoured article that the shepherds dealt in, because it furnished
the material for the clothes {SIG-KU) of the people. The wool
is arranged according to quality. Four qualities are distinguished ;
then comes the common wool {DU\ after this the black {GIG),
and lastly the wool called ZUM. The &U-NIGIN gives the total
income of the wool according to talents and manas. That each
of these tablets is simply an account of the wool gotten from one
particular herd is evident from the fact that the name of the
shepherd {NA-GIB) to whom the herd belongs is almost always
given.
The expressions which occur in these tablets are the fol-
lowing : —
I. SIG. This sign we have already found in O. B. I. 87, ii. 44.
T. C. 293, ' non assimiU! But see Jensen, K. B. iii '. p. 30, note 10
(Gudea B, iv. 42). ^/(?=Assyr. sipdtu, Br. 10781, H. W. B. 678,
' wool.'
SIG-KU=-Updtu ana lubuktum (comp. Nbr. 754, 6), ' wool for
clothes.' The following "kinds' of this SIG-KU (or only KU,
in which case we ought to add a SIG; comp. E. A. H. 48, i, 2,
SIG-KU; in 11. 3, 4, 5 only KU = {SIG)-KU. In E. A. H. 49
we have SIG-KU only in 1. i, but in the following lines KU = an
abbreviation for SIG-KU, so everywhere in these tablets where KU
stands alone) are mentioned : —
(a) SIG-KU LUGAL.
{&) SIG-KU Uk-LUGAL.
(f) {SIG)-KU Ill-kam-U^.
{J) {SIG)-KU IV-kam-U&.
OF BAByLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS 385
{e) SIG-DU.
(/) SIG-DU-GIG.
(g) SIG-GIG.
{h) SIG-LUM.
(a) Wherever the SIG-KU LUGAL is mentioned, it stands
first. It is therefore the ' wool ' {SIG) of ' royal quality ' = the
highest excellence.
(b) Next to it is the SIG U&-LUGAL. U^, Br. 5032, emgdu,
H. W. B. 79. The 'wool' U&-LUGAL, then, is the wool that
' stands ' (JUS) nearest to that of royal quality, i. e.'here as much as
' second quality.'
(f), (<^) If V^-LUGAL is = ' second kind,' then III-i«"»-U& and
IV-^"'-U^ are the third or fourth kinds respectively. Lit. the wool
{sig) which stands (KS) third {III-^"^), &c., in quality. In some
cases the kam is left out.
{e) SIG-DU. The wool thus signified always follows in. those
tablets that of the ' fourth ' quality ; it must be therefore of a less
quality than the IV-^"'-U&. Thureau-Dangin may be right in
supposing for DU some such sense as ' commun, ordinaire,' R. A.
iii. 136.
(/), {g) SIG-GIG. For this expression, see iv. R. 8, iii. 28, 29.
SIG-UD SIG-GIG = ii-pa-a-te pi-sa-a-teli-pa-a-te sal-ma-a-te,
SIG- GIG, then, is the ' black wool.' SIG-B U- GrlG = the common
black wool.
(K) SIG-LUM occurs in E. A. H. 48, 5 : 3 gHnu 38 ma-na
ZUM-4-ui—'heTe LUM alone, neither SIG nor .ff'ZZ stands before
it; E.A. H. 47, 5: 6ganu KU-LUM-4-m; E. A. H. 51, 4: [(?£/-
^UH] irU-LUM-4-ul Comp. with this latter E. A. H. 50, 6 :
I GUSUR SIG-DU-GIG. It will be noticed here that whenever
this LUM is mentioned, 'kam' after the numeral 4 is omitted.
This LUM-vioo\ follows after that of the 'fourth quality,' but
stands before the SIG-DU. Ought we to see in this LUM only
another expression for GIGl E. A. H. 51, 4, compared with
E. A. H. 50, 6, would favour this.
LUM=unnuhu and uiUbu, 'to sprout,' H. W. B. pp. 97 and
c c
386
THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
T41. Could we derive from this the signification of 'young ' wool
in the sense of wool that is not yet grown long ?
2. Sometimes we find after the qualities mentioned sub (a)-(e)
also the expression IGI-NU-SA G-{ge). With what meaning ?
3. In some texts we also are told from what particular part of the
sheep's body this wool was taken. Comp., e. g., R. A. iii. 131, i :
2 ma-na 15 TU SIG GU-UDU KU-LUGAL IGI-NU-SAG-ge.
The sign for GU here is that of Br. 3202. For the meaning of
it, see Delitzsch, Ass. St. pp. 122 and 138, and comp. such expres-
sions as esen dru, esen sir elippi, H. W. B. 121. The SIG-
GU-UDU, then, is the 'wool taken from the back {GU) of the
sheep {UDU).' See Thureau-Dangin, R. A. iii. 132, i.
4. GU or GUNU {Br. 3199, here apparently an abbreviation of
Br. 3334, GUN) = hiltu. I GU= 60 MA-NA ; i MA-NA =
60 2"^/ (shekel) ; i rZ7= i8o &E. See Reissner, J. A. O. S. 18,
5. SIG BA-LAL. LAL=laMlu, H. W. B. p. 685 : 'the wool
was paid for,' sc. ' with money ' (see A. B. P. R. p. 95).
Obverse.
E. A. H. 47.
WWMM^^^
^^'
Reverse.
'<'ia'.-*{iMH4- .
^t ^- Y ^
^M^ssj^
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS ^ 387
E, A. H. 47.
I gdnu ku-lugal I talent of (wool for) clothing,
royal quality
3 gilnu \o\ ma-na ku-us- 3 talents loj manas of (wool for)
lr4gal clothing, second quality
\o giinu 10 ma-na ku-III- 10 talents 10 manas of (wool for)
kam-us clothing, third quality
36 gilnu ku-IV-kam-ui 36 talents of (wool for) clothing,
fourth quality
5 6 gHnu ku-LUM-IV-us 6 talents of (wool for) clothing,
L UM, fourth quality
I gdnu 24 ma-na sig-du i talent 24 manas of common
wool
lu-nigin 57 gHnu 44^ ma-na Total : 57 talents 44^ manas of
\SIG-SUN'\ wool
Ir-dug-ga [na-gi'd] Irdugga [shepherd]
stg ba-M ud-I-kam The wool was paid for on the first
day
10 hg Tik-ab-ba-^' Tik-ab-ba-^i
Mu^"") Bur-^''") Sin lugal In the year when king Bur-Sin(II.)
Ur-bil-lum-''' mu-^ul devastated Urbilluni.
c c 2
388
THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
E. A. H. 48.
Obverse.
w^wm^^m$-^^
Reverse.
9
10
w
^r 4 r
'Tf
4^ mm:-
M^^^^^^-^'-^
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS 389
E. A. H. 48.
Sig-ku-lugal Wool for clothing, royal quality '
1 gHnu sig-ku-ui-lugal r talent of wool for clothing,
second quality
5 gHnu 3 ma-na ku-III-kam- 5 talents 3 manas of (wool for)
«■? clothing, third quality
24 gUnu 22 ma-na ku-lV- 24 talents 22 manas of (wool for)
kam-ui clothing, fourth quality
5 3 giinu 37 ma-na ku-LUM- 3 talents 37 manas of (wool for)
IV-u^ clothing, LUM, fourth quality
2 [6 ma-nd\ sig-du 2 [6 manas] of common wool
E-zi na-gid Ezi, shepherd
iu-nigin 34 gilnu 28 ma-na Total : 34 talents 28 manas of
sig-sun wool
sig la-lal ud-I-kam The wool was paid for on the first
day
10 ic^ Ki-nu-nir-^' Borsippa
Mu (''") Bur-(*^'*i Sin lugal-e In the year when king Bur-Sin
Ur-hil-lum-^' mu-^ul (II.) devastated Urbillum.
' The amount of wool in this line is left out. Comp. also-E. A. H. 51,
where the GU&UR-KU-LUGAL is left out, and E. A. H. 52, 6, where we
have only GUS UR-SIG-Z) U i gUnu.
39°
THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
E. A. H. 49.
Obverse.
'^^^MW^^-
M&-
W
W^^^m^^^=-
^ii4 mwwj^ r
~^WW^W^'
|E«^?tW^<^
Reverse.
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS 391
E. A. H. 49.
2 gilnu 331^ ma-na sig-ku- 2 talents 33|- manas of wool for
lugal clothing, royal quality
3 gHnu 1 1 ma-na ku-ul- 3 talents 1 1 manas of (wool for)
lugal clothing, second quality
4 gunu 14 ma-na ku-III- 4 talents 14 manas of (wool for)
kam-us clothing, third quality
10 gilnu ku-IV-kam-us 10 talents of (wool for) clothing,
fourth quality
5 45 ma-na sig-du 45 manas of common wool
su-nigin 20 gHnu ^-^^ ma-na Total: 20 talents 43|- manas of
sig-sun wool
E-zi na-gid Ezi, shepherd
Sig ba-lal ud-6-kam The wool was paid for on the sixth
day
iag Ki-nu-nir-''' Borsippa
10 Mu^''"^ Bur-^''"'^ Sin lugal-e In the year when king Bur-Sin
\Ur-hi\l-lum-^* mu-gul (II.) devastated Urbillum.
392
THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
E. A. H. 122.
Obverse.
JWWW^
W&mmWif^
I^TS^^W^l!^
Reverse.
II
12
13
14
^g^^^^
"f w
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS 393
E. A. H. 122.
24^ ma-na KU-lugal 24-^ manas of (wool for) clothing,
royal quality
45^ ma-na KV-ul-lugal i,^\ manas of (wool for) clothing,
second quality
PA i/r-(A«,f«>) Nin-gii-zid- Overseer : Ur-Ningishzidda
da
i6f ma-na KU-lugal i6| manas of (wool for) clothing,
royal quality
5 44 ma-na 10 TU KU-ui 44 manas 10 shekels of (wool for)
clothing, second quality
PA U^-MU Overseer: U&-MU
17 ma-na 15 TU KU-lugal i>j manas 15 shekels of (wool for)
clothing, royal quality
4oi ma-na KU-td-lugal 40^ manas of (wool for) clothing,
second quality
L UGA L-U-KA&-& U-E Lugal-u-has-U-e
10 24 ma-na 5 TU KU-lugal 24 manas 5 shekels of (wool for)
clothing, royal quality
45|- ma-na KU-uhlugal 45^ manas of (wool for) clothing,
second quality
(Gd)lu (<t'"£rif) Ba-u ii Enim- (Ga)lu-Ba'u and Enim-Ba'u, shep-
(dingir) Ba-u ni-ku herds
ud \-kam On the fourth day (the wool was
paid for)
lag Ki-nu-nir^' Borsippa.
394
THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
E. A. H. 50.
Obverse.
^^
r
^^^Vi
T
^^
Reverse.
MLM^m41^
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS
395
Similar in contents to the preceding are E. A. H. 50-52. They
treat of some ' stuff ' or ' wool ' furnished for clothes. The sign
transcribed by us with GUSUR is by no means certain ; by reading
it GU^UR, I would like to identify it with Br. 5500, iinlu; see
H. W. B. 670, 'hntu, eine bestimmte Art Thierpelz oder WoUstoff.'
This latter meaning probably has to be taken here. The TA at
the end of each line = ana, ' for ' so and so many manas, sc. of
money. Hence these tablets would be accounts of the buying {(a)
of a certain kind of stuff {GUSUR), to be worked up by the so-
called GIN-U&-BAR, ' Weber/rauen.' Just as the preceding
tablets state the selling (lal) of the wool by the shepherd, so these
tell us the buying of that wool for the U&-BAR (' Weberei'), in
which the GIN-U&-BAR {Weber/rauen) are employed.
E. A. H. 50.
2 gtisur-ku-lugal 30 ma-na-
ia
7 gusur-ku-ul-lugal op ma-
na-ta
1 1 guiur-ku-III-kam-us i
gUnu-ta
32 gusur-ku-IV-kam-ui i
gUnu-ta
5 I gusur sig-du i gunil\^ta f]
1 guiur-sig-du-gig i giinu-
\ta-\
iu-nigin 54 gusur-sun
ud-2-kam
sag Ki-nu-nir-ki
10 Mu ('■'") Bur-^'^") Sin lugal
Ur-bil-lum-'^' mu-^ul
2 gushur for clothing, royal
quality, for 30 manas
7 gushur for clothing, second
quality, for 30 manas
II gushur for clothing, third
quality, for i talent
32 gushur for clothing, fourth
quality, for i talent
I gushur of common wool, for i
talent
I gushur of common wool, black,
for I talent
Total : 54 gushur
The second day
Borsippa
In the year when king Bur-Sin
(II.) devastated Urbillum.
39<5
THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
E. A. H. 51.
Obverse.
Reverse.
it^
W^W~^^
■^ <^^ ^M^ .^^
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS
397
E. A. H. 51.
2 guiur-ku-ui-lugal 30 ma-
na-ta
4 gulur-ku-IIl-kam-ul i
gUnu-ta
24 \_guiur\-ku-IV-kam-ui i
gUnu-ta
3 gulur-ku-LVM 4-«^(sic)
I gUnu-ta
5 guhur-sig-du i giinu-ia
su-nigin 33 guiur-sun
ud-i-kam
tag Ki-nu-nir-^'
Mu (''«) Bur-V'*) Sin lugal-e
Ur-bil-lum-^' mu-^ul
2 gushur for clothing, second
quality, for 30 manas
4 gushur for clothing, third
quality, for i talent
24 [gushur] for clothing, fourth
quality, for i talent
3 [gushur] of wool, that is LUM,
fourth quality, for i talent
gushur of common wool, for i
talent
Total : 33 gushur
The first day
Borsippa
In the year when king Bur-Sin
(II.) devastated Urbillum.
398 THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
E. A. H. 52.
Obverse.
w— ^
-rn
r)
k^
Reverse,
^'U<Y.&t<^Vf
^f^
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS
399
E. A.
guiur [^ku-lugal] 30 ma-
n\_a-ta\
7 guiur-ku-ui-lugal 30 ma-
na-ta
25 guiur-ku-III-kam-uh i
gUnu-ta
I gulur-ku-NIN-LAM''-
Ill-kam-us gHnu
5 45 guiur-ku-IV-kam-vi i
gilnu-ta
guiur-sig-du 1 ^^««
su-nigin 8 1 gtdur-sun
ud-[i ?]-kam
iag \_Ki-n'\u-nir-^'
10 Mu 'f''*) BuM''") Sin lugal-e
Ur-bil-lum-''' mu-^ul
H. 52.
3 gushur for clothing, royal
quality, for 30 manas
7 gushur for clothing, second
quality, for 30 manas
25 gushur for clothing, third
quality, for i talent
I gushur for ' splendid ' clothing,
third quality, for . . . talent
45 gushur for clothing, fourth
quality, for i talent
gushur of common wool, for
I talent
Total : 81 gushur
The . . . day
Borsippa
In the year when king Bur-Sin II.
devastated Urbillum.
E. A. H. 56 enumerates the cattle which furnished the wool
{SIG). The cattle that could be shorn were the ganam, udu-gal,
udu-ui, and puhddu-ha-ur . The latter more or less comprised the
sal-puhddu 2l5 well as the puhddu-us. The puhddu-nu-ur are always
enumerated separately. They, although belonging to the ' herds '
as such, were not shorn — a corroboration of the correctness of the
meaning ' nu-ur'=.' not weaned '=' sucking.'
The numerals at the end of 11. 5, 10, 14, 20, 24, 29, 33, refer
to the number of animals that furnished the wool — the puhddu-nu-
ur excepted. The sum total of these animals is given in 1. 38 :
796. It ought to be, however, 795 ; the adding together of the
above-given numerals as well as those given in 11. 34, 35 shows this.
L.' 34 gives the number of the udu, i. e. the ganam, udu-gal, and
udu-ui ; 1. 35 the number of the puhddu-ha-ur. And because all
' For KU-NIN-LAM, see Br. 12055, lamjulU, H. W. B. 380:
Oder Staatskleid.
Pracht-
400
THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
the udu are ' ba-ur,' i. e. weaned, they are counted together with the
puhddu-ba-ur , and called in 1. 39 simply udu-ba-ur, the number of
which is 795 {sic), not 796, as the tablet gives.
L. 36 gives the whole amount of the wool received from the
flocks of the seven following shepherds : — Tiggil, Lugal-an-azaggi,
Abbaginna, Baziggi, Ur-Gula, Ur-Ba'u, son of Atu, and Shuna. LI.
18 and 22 are rather mutilated, so that it is impossible for me to
determine exactly how many gllnu and ma-na of wool the flocks
of Baziggi and Ur-Gula yielded; 6 gHnu and 55 ma-na, however,
have to be divided among these two flocks. The tablet reads :
00
E. A. H. 66.
Obverse.
^^^^
y<y nyp
a:
^WJM^f
^^ ^Tfm4 _}^ i
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS 401
E. A. H. 56.
Obverse.
33 ganam 6 udu-gal 33 ewes, 6 rams
20 udu-ui lo-lal-i puhddu- 20 mature sheepi 9 weaned lambs
ba-ur
sig-bi 2 gHnu 20 ma-na furnished on wool (lit. its wool is)
2 talents 20 manas
20-lal-i pukddu-nu-ur 19 sucking Iambs
5 Tig-gil 68 Tiggil (shepherd) 68
^o ganam 10 udu-gal 30 ewes, 10 rams
35 udu-u} 35 mature sheep
sig-bi 2 gilnu 30 ma-na furnished on wool 2 talents 30
manas
pukddu-nu-ur sucking lambs
10 Lugal-an-azag-gi 75 Lugal-Anazaggi (shepherd) 75
^o ganam 10 udu-gal 50 ewes, 10 rams
50 udu-ui 20 puhddu-ba-ur 50 mature sheep, 20 weaned
lambs
Sig-bi 4 ^!?«a 50 ma-na furnished on wool 4 talents 50
manas
Ab-ba-gin-na 130 Abbaginna (shepherd) 130
15 pu^du-nu-ur sucking lambs
14 ganam 6 udu-ui 14 ewes, 6 rams
Left side.
iu-nigin 76 puhddu-nu-ur Total : 76 sucking lambs
796 (sic) 796 (sic. Read 795)
udu-ba-ur ud 10 ham weaned sheep. The tenth day
40 lag Tik-ab-ba-^i Tikabba
Mu (ei^-gu-za (*»^'') £n- In the year (when king Bur-Sin
/?■/-/«(/) II. erected) the throne of BSl.
Dd
402
THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
E. A. H. 56.
Reverse.
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS
403
Reverse.
17 io-lal-i puhddu-ba-ur
s(g-bi
puhddu-nu-ur
20 Ba-zig-gi 29
72 ganam 20 udu-gal 60
22 puhddu-ba-ur sig-bi . . .
puhddu-nu-ur
Ur-Gu-la 174
25 68 ganam 20 udu-gal 130
3 1 puhddu-ba-ur
sig-bi 8 ^«?«« 1 1 ma-na
37 puhddu-nu-ur
Ur-i<i'«£i'-) Ba-u dumu A-iu
2$o-lal-i
30 ^Qganam6udu-gal2^udu-ui
10 puhddu-ba-ur sig-bi 2
^«?«« 20 ma-na
2 o puhddu-nu-ur
Su-na 70
Su-ntgin 694 ttrf«
35 lu-nigin loi puhddu-ba-ur
sig-bi 2 7 ^«?w« 6 ma-na
9 weaned lambs
furnished on wool . . .
sucking lambs
Baziggi (shepherd) 29
72 ewes, 20 rams, 60 mature sheep
20 weaned lambs furnished on
wool . . .
sucking lambs
Ur-Gula (shepherd) 174
68 ewes, 20 rams, 130 mature
sheep
31 weaned lambs
furnished on wool 8 talents 11
manas
37 sucking lambs
Ur-Ba'u, the son of Atu (shep-
herd) 249
30 ewes, 6 rams, 24 mature sheep
loweaned lambs furnished on wool
2 talents 20 manas
20 sucking lambs
Shuna (shepherd) -70
Total : 694 sheep
Total: I oi weaned lambs
Wool furnished: 27 talents 6
manas
D d 2
404
THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
E. A. H. 107.
Not only in wool dealt the shepherds at that time, but also in
^ins{RUG=ma}ku). Among the skins mentioned here are those
of the UDU{= sheep), of the UDU-AL (for AL, see under LJD-
AL, p. 367, i) = full-grown sheep, and of the UZ (goats). The
E. A. H. 107.
Obverse.
TTT
<M^f^h^ <
^^^feCLfe^^
w^wxww^,
<ww^^
WW
^^^^ww^
<«w>r^p^
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS
405
RUG-GUL probably are the ' bad ' skins, which were not as good
as the others. For GUL, see Br. 9500 = kaldlu, H. W. B.
p. 585. GUL is apparently adj. = kallu, ' gertng,' also ' klein,
schwach' ; comp. also GUL = livtnu, ' schlecht,' H. W. B. 380.
The best signification, however, may be derived from the original
meaning of the sign GUL = eye + bad = ' bad looking.'
The 'total' of the skins of the sheep is too small by 20, for 586
sheepskins are mentioned in the body of the tablet.
■ The tablet reads :
E. A. H. 107.
Obverse.
230 rug udu
10 rug udu-al 10 rug- 1 I
{Gd)lu-dingir-ra dumu Ur-
(dingir) Da-mu
$3 rug 14 rug-'gul
5 (<li«g'f) Uiu4ag-ga
22 rug 14 rug-^ul
Ur-Gii-mar
19 r«^ 25 rug-^ul
ljf.(dingir) Bun-pa-ud-du
10 35 Cr-t*"^''') Ntnd
30 rug 4 rug-'gul
Bar dumu Ug-me-uru-sag
10 rug 14 rug-^ul
Dug-gi-ul
15 36 t*"^'*') Ulu-ki-ag
230 skins of sheep
10 skins of full-grown sheep, 10
skins (of sheep) two years old
Amilili, the son of Ur-Damu
(shepherd)
53 skins, 14 bad skins
Utushagga (shepherd)
22 skins, 14 bad skins
Ur-Gishmar (shepherd)
19 skins, 25 bad skins
Ur-Dunpauddu (shepherd)
35 (skins), Ur-NinS (shepherd)
30 skins, 4 bad skins
Bar, the son of Uhmeurusag
10 skins, 14 bad skins
Duggiul (shepherd)
36 (skins), Utukiag
4o6
THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
E. A. H. 107.
Reverse.
i6| ri<]^ ^"^ "^
17 ^
^ f^ p^
18
19
20
21
23
24
25
0^
^T-^ T J^<fg^
^S^^-^r^lTWr
p
i,"f5(r^j2f-^;b&i'
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS 407
Reverse.
16 131 rug uz 131 skins of goats
Ur-^dingir) Kal (Kalbi-La- Kalbi-Lamassu
massu)
Su-nigin 566 ' rug udu-sun Total : 566 skins of sheep
iu-nigin 7 1 rug-^ul Total : 7 1 bad skins
20 Nam-ne-ru-hi-nu-kud Namnerubinukud "
Gir {Ga)lu-bi-mu The Gir (Ga)lubimu
Gir{Ga)lu-(d'«^i'-) Nin-gir-su The Gir (Ga)lu-Ningirsu
it {Ga)lu-dingtr-ra dup-sar and AmSiili, the scribe
Itu Su-kul In the month Shukul
25 mu ffu-hu-tiu-ri-''' ba-^ul In the year when (the king)
devastated Huhunuri.
E. A. H. 152 gives us an account of feed consumed by the flocks
of the different shepherds during a whole month, or thirty days.
The measure according to which the account is given is ^A.
iKA = 6oGIN; 7,00 KA = \ GUR; ■^,600 GUR=ikara(Rtis%-
ner, J. A. O. S. 18, p. 373). The feed consists in grain {SE).
The fuller expression for '80 udu i\ ka' would be '80 udu
i\ ka-ta' i.e. 80 sheep, every one receives during a month («d'-30-
karri) \\ ka, which of course is as much as ' 80 sheep, at \\ ka
a head monthly.' If i sheep receives \\ ka of grain during
30 days, it receives daily 3 gin of grain. Sheep fed with i ka
monthly receive daily 2 gin. If 1 2 lambs receive 6 ka of grain
during the whole month, one lamb receives daily i gin, and during
a month 30 gin or \ ka. Hence we have to translate 1. 20 as given
below. Of the 10 oxen mentioned in 1. 21, every one receives daily
16 gin, while those mentioned in 1. 22 receive daily only 12 gin.
The oxen, therefore, receive 4 to 8 times as much as the sheep.
' Sic. Read 586.
2 See Br. 2:82. In Assyrian this line would he = Ma.mtt-su[nu ?)-ld-
itamiifi), i.e. His (their) oath(s) he (they) shall not swear.' Is this a nom.
propr., or does it refer to 11. 21-23 ?
4o8
THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
Instead of 190 ka in 11. 3, 6, 9, 12, we ought to read 193 ka, for
80X i\ (=120)4-73 = 193 ^^' &E-BI, lit. = its grain = makes
(sc. for the whole month) so and so many ka.
In 1. 17 the numeral 77 is written 60 + MA^. For MAS=io,
see v. A. 2596, col. ii. i in A. B. P. R. p. 58 (texts).
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
E. A. H. 152.
Obverse.
m^
T«
^Sa^
T-< trr
jtt^'
T^
WW^^^^
1j^ mr^-t^ r
T-« a" T«=f ^
T^ gr T ^
15
16
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Reverse.
I ^^t^ l
WFF
^L
-(.Tf aS- ffl >f
^MIMl^
4 -^ W
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS 409
E. A. H. 152.
80 udu i\ka 80 sheep at ij ka
73 udu I ka 73 sheep at 1 Ea
h-bi 190 Nin-kal-la makes 190 (ka), Ninkalla (shep-
herd)
80 udu \\ka 80 sheep at ij ka
5 73 udu I ka 73 sheep at i ka
le-bi 190 {Ga)lu-kal-la makes 190 i^a), (Ga)lukalla
80 udu i\ka 80 sheep at ij ka
73 udu 1 ka 73 sheep at i ka
h-bi 190 An-ni makes 190 (ka) Anni
10 80 udu i\ka 80 sheep at i\ ka
73 udu I ka 73 sheep at i ka
h-bi 190 makes 190 (ka)
{Ga)lu-^'iing{r) ])^tn-M (Ga)lu-Ninshul (see p. 57)
80 udu I ka 80 sheep at i ka
15 A-na-mu Anamu
77 udu I ka 77 sheep at i ka
h-bi 11 ka makes 77 ka
12 pu^ddu-dir is Iambs over and above
h-bi 6 ka makes 6 ka
20 6 ka kis mai 6 ka for all, ^ (for one)
10 gud 8 ka TO oxen at 8 ka
9 gud 6 ka 9 oxen at 6 ka
h-bi 134 ka makes 134 ka
liu ^2e«-(*«-f«>') Dumu-gi Ezen-Dumuzi
25 Ud-30-kam For 30 days.
Officials.
From I Sam. xxi. 8 (?i»fifb ityN D^Vin I'SK) we know that at
the time of Saul there existed among the shepherds a certain
410 THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
hierarchy. The same is true with regard to this time. Not only
do we find a certain gradation among the shepherds, but also
among all the other officials— may they be connected with the
temple-service or the granaries ?
The traces of such officials can be followed up even to the oldest
times. The attention of the reader has been drawn from time to
time to this fact. Comp. e. g. dam-kar-gal (' chief agent,' Hilpr.
O. B. I. 262), which occurs I.e. No. 94, ^^'"sr'f) _ Nin-dtn-dug (so
Hilprecht, better : (■^'V'''-) Innanna-edin) Ur-^^'"e''''i En-lil dam-kar-
gal a-mu-sub, with dam-kar in 1. c. No. 95 : \pi»sir NA;in-din-dug-
ga Ur-Ma-ma dam-kar (so only !) S^'^^sir E\n-\lit\ a-mu-rta-sub ;
pa-le-si with pa-te-si-gal (D^c. 6, No. 4, 1. 8). At the time of
Sargon I. we had the PA-AL {=Mbra), DI-KUD daianu), A-ZU.
Also Gudea (Statue B, iv. 13 ffi) mentions the following officials:
ne-ur, nu-banda, pa, {ga)lu-zi-ga, kin-a-ra-ba-ba, sig-gii-su-ag nam-
sig lu-ba mu-gal-a-an, which Thureau-Dangin, R. A. iii. p. 129, i,
translates : ' le prifet, t iniendant, h surveillant, le soldat, celui qui
iisse des lat'nes de diffe'rentes couleurs, ont chSm^'' (see also Jensen,
K. B. iii'. p. 31, and notes, ibidem).
Among the officials connected in some way or another with the
herds occur in the E. A. H. texts the following : (a) engar ; {b)
na-gid ; (c) sib ; {d) nu-banda-gud ; (e) pa (lug-ma^) ; {/) ni-ku ;
(g) ^al ; {fi) dup-sar-gud or dup-sar-gud-engar or dup-sar-gud-X,
&c., &c.
{a) ENGAR (Br. 1024; Z. A. iii. p. 199 fif.). This word
occurred already in O. B. I; 19, 3: ^'""^'•r) Bur-'^'''^^''') Sin . . .
engar lig-ga. Engar is the Hebrew 13X, Assyr. ikkaru (a Semitic
word adopted by Sumerian language, Zimmern, Babylon. Busspsal-
men, p. 5, i); as such it means 'a farmer' (Z. A. iii. p. 199 sq. ;
Delitzsch, Assyr. Worterbuch, p. 400). It is a synonym of erelu,
Talm. KDi"iN(Br. 1023 ; Z. A. iii. p. 200), as well as olndkidu, rid
alpe; hence it is-parallel in Gudea F, iii. 1 4, with utul (1. 1 8), sib (iv. 3),
na-gid (iv. 12). Engar may therefore be translated by ' farmer ' or
' shepherd,' because farmers ' till the ground ' and ' raise the stock,'
Hilprecht, O. B. I. p. 28, 3. Distinguish, however, between
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS 411
ENGAJi-GUD=' shepherd of the oxen,' and GUD-ENGAR =
' oxen employed for tilling of the ground ' ; see above, p. 334, i (c).
(b) NA-GID. The sign for GID is not = PA, but = Br. 2702
(Z. A. iii. 208). It, too, is a Semitic word taken into the Sumerian
language = Hebr. li?.'3. Comp. O. B. I. 18 : ¥>»£r'r) Ur-('^*"e''''>
Nin-ib . . . na-gid Uru-um-^'-ma. In Gudea F, iv. 12, it is
parallel to etigar ; see sub {a). NA-GID in the E. A. H. texts
occurs only on tablets which mention UDU (cattle) or SIG (wool,
E. A. H. 48, 7).
{c) SIB, Br. 5688, re'u, although not mentioned as an official
name, yet occurs sometimes before proper names. Another word
for 'shepherd' is also utul, Gudea F, iii. 18, which however does
not occur in the E. A. H. texts.
{d) NU-BANDA. According to Jensen, K. B. iii'. p. 31,
note **o, it is composed out oi NU = ' Au/seher, Verwdlter,' and
BAN DA etwa = ' stellvertretender Au/seher.' According to ii. R.
51, 44, NU-BANDA is = labuM =^j\ ^'C = ' Vorsteher,
Wortfiihrer, Gebieter,' H. W. B, p. 373.'
NU-BANDA-GUD = labutM m alpe. As such he had under
him 'deux bouviers' (Thureau-Dangin, R. A. iii. p. 129).
(1?) PA. In Z. K. ii. pp. 301 and 302, PA is = aklu or Mpiru.
That PA must signify a certain official is evident from Gudea B,
iv. 13 ff. Comp. also iv. R. 38, iii. i ; Hilprecht, Assyriaca, p. 16,
No. I ; and p. 55, under pa-te-si. Meissner, A. B. P. R. p. 126,
maintains that PA = amSlu. That PA cannot be = atnilu, Thureau-
Dangin already has shown, R. A. iii. p. 129, according to whom
expressions such as P A-DAM-KAR, PA-^U-ffA are = mailre
marchand, maitre pgcheur. The PA-MAR-TU of A. B. P. R.
No. 107 is undoubtedly parallel to RAB (^'"si'-) MAR-TU
(A. B. P. R. No. no), and 'sans douie quelque employe du temple de
MAR-TU! The PA occurs in the following compositions : —
PA E i^'^e'r) Dumu-zi-ge, E. A. H. 106, 3, which can be
translated only the PA [aklu, sdpt'ru) of the temple of Dumuzi.
Comp. also the seal, ibid.
PA-SANGA, p. 379 (E. A. H. 104, 22), 'high-priest.'
412 THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
PA-LUG AL-ENGAR, ' the PA of the royal shepherds,' p. 379
(E. A. H. 34, 25).
According to E. A. H. 33, 34, 121, the PA must have had four
engar under him. This is corroborated by O. B. I. 126, where the
following PA are mentioned : —
(i) PA £V-(*«^»''-) NIN-ZU {sic ; read Nin-a-zu) nu-banda-
gud{ii. 4).
(2) PA Lugal-ni-lag nu-banda-gud {^\\. 17).
(3) PA Ur-Ma-ma nu-handa-gud (iv. 20).
(4) PA Al-la nu-banda-gud {y\. 15).
(5) PA Ab-ba nu-banda-gud (rev. i. 7).
(6) PA (<i'»S'r) Utu-kam nu-ianda-gud (rev. ii. 19).
Every one of these six PA had four engar under him.
To No. I belong —
Ur- (i. 19).
AZAG- (i. 24).
UR-&ID dumu Ur-^<"»ei'^ Nind {i. 31).
GE-^AG-MU engar (ii. 3).
To No. 2 belong —
.... . ..(ii.?..).
E-GIS-MI engar (iii. 2).
(dingir) Utu-MU^ engar (iii. 11).
LugaH^'^f^'*") Uiu engar (iii. 16).
To No. 3 belong —
Lugal-KAR-ZI engar (iii. last line).
{dingir) Nind-MA-AN-UD-DI^ engar (iv. 5).
A-NE-MI engar (iv. 10).
Lugal-EZEN engar (iv. 19).
To No. 4 belong —
{Ga)lu-('"«^''-) NIN-^UL engar (v. i).
\Gd)lu-'^^i«eir'\ PA-SAG engar (v. 11).
Ur-idingir) Nin-gtl-zt'd-da engar (v. 23).
Ga{lu)-KA-SAL engar (vi. 14).
* = Samai-iddina.
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS 413
To No. 5 belong —
{Ga)lu ('''"frir) AN{=Anu) engar (vi. 4 from end).
IGI-&AG-^AG engar (vii. 10).
A(/)-NAM-URU-NA engar (vii. 5 from end).
UrAdingir) PA-SAG engar (rev. i. 6).
To No. 6 belong —
Lugal-ENGAR engar (rev. i. 14).
ZA {dA ?yBA-ZI-ZI engar {xt\.\i, i).
Ur- *■».?■»» Nin-gii-zid-da engar (rev. ii. 9).
Ur-GAN-NE (BIL) engar (rev. ii. 18).
The six PA, however, were subordinate to another PA, Ur-
(.Ungir) JVIN-GIP {=Almu, Br. 11070) by name (rev. ii. 22, and
especially rev. vii. 3), who in his capacity as ' chief overseer ' was
an oflScer of (*«^«»-) GUG-KAM, the patesi. It is evident there-
fore—
(i) That the patesi was the highest official of the king (in O. B. I.
126 apparently of Bur-Sin II.).
(2) That the patesi had, again, an oflBcial under him, who is called
PA. This PA undoubtedly is the same as the LUG-MAG
pa-te-si, which official occurs generally (instead of this PA) on
these tablets (comp. R. A. iii. pp. 124, 126, 131), and as such has to
be distinguished from the other PA (No. 3). Thureau-Dangin,
I.e., remarks about this ZUdf-MAG: ' le ZC/ff ou soukkalou, c'esi
le IN^D, le ministre, le fac-totum. Peui-itre le soukkalou mafji^ou
iiait-il une sorte d! administrateur des domaines du temple sur lesquels
le palest, en sa qualiU de chef religieux, aurait eu la haute main'
(3) That this PA or LUd^-MAG had, again, at least six other
PA under him (as in 0. B. I. 126. This P.4= overseer).
(4) That O. B. I. 126 is an account of all the herds of the
different PA (overseers), while E. A. H. 33, 34, 121, give us an
account of only one PA.
(5) That this one PA was an official who had four engar,
' shepherds,' under him ; the title must therefore be translated ' over-
seer.' According to this the PA E is = overseer of a temple ;
414 T^HE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
PA-SANGA = overseer of the priests = high-priest ; PA Irtgal-
engar = overseer of the royal shepherds.
(6) That expressions like PA Ab-ba nu-banda-gud cz.n only mean
Ab-ba, the overseer {P.A) of the nu-banda-gud.
{/) NI-KU. Composed out oi NI {= rabd, zikaru, Br. 5323,
5328) and KU (= rubH, Br. 10547). The NI-KU then would be
a high official. According to Thureau-Dangin, R. A. iii. p. 129,
' cing NOU-BANDA-GUD etaient soumis h un NI-KOU.' I do
not know upon what text that scholar bases his assertion ; this
much only I can say, that this official occurs on the E. A. H. texts
only in connection with the UPU (cattle). These latter tablets,
however, are too small to base any conclusion upon them, they being
generally the account of the herd of one NA^GJD. If I may
venture to make a suggestion, I would assign to the NI-KU not
five but six NU-BANBA-GUB, provided that the former official
was also connected with the 'oxen.' In that case we would get,
according to O. B. I. 126, the following arrangement: —
King
Patesi
1 LUG-MA& or PA who had under him =
2 NI-KV or (GAL) =
6 PA =
12 NU-BANDA-GUD -
24 engar or na-gid.
(g) GAL. The reader will have noticed thait the highest official
is always mentioned last (comp. O. B. I. 126: engar — PA — PA
(= lu^-ma^) — pa-k-si—iugal; and R. A, iii. p. 131 : PA-^NI-KOU
— LUG-MA^— ^pa-te-si^lugaiy In E. A. H. 121, 47, where
this official occurs, he is mentioned after the PA. That tablet being
an account of the GUD of four shepherds under the supervision of
the 'overseer,' PA UR-GAR, it is natural to suppose that the
GAL was also an official connected in some way or another with
the GUD, and he, being mentioned after the PA, undoubtedly has
the same rank as the NI-KU; see under (_/"). Probably the GAL
was of the same rank among the ENGAR as was theiV/-.A',£''among
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS 415
the NA-GID, i. e. the (^AL of the GUD (oxen) would be called
NI-KU\{ he presided over the shepherds of the cattle. ^AL,
according to Br. 82, = Mbu, libu, H, W. B. p. 652, which meaning
{alt sei'n, Alter, Greis) undoubtedly indicates his high rank.
(},) DUP-SAR-GUD-ENGAR (R. A. iii. p. 130).
DUP-SAR-GUD-X (O. B. I. 126, iv. 8).
DUP-SAR-GUD-I sag-gud-II-ku (E. A. H. 34, 22).
The literal translation of these passages would be : —
scribe — oxen — employed for tilling the ground,
scribe — oxen — 10.
scribe — oxen-I exchanged for oxen-II.
This latter passage is remarkable. It has been shown above
that when a numeral follows GUD or any other animal, that
numeral indicates the age. GUD-I, GUD-II therefore can only
mean ox of one year, ox of two years ; hence GUD-X must mean
ox ten years old. Thureau-Dangin, R. A. iii. p. 129, translates
'jDUP-SAR GUD-X' by • bouvier-scribe {chef) de 10 bcBu/s.'
Against this translation may be said —
(i) that 'ten oxen' are not expressed in these texts by GUD-X,
but by X Gud.
(2) According to that scholar's translation, we ought to translate
E. A. H. 34, 22, by ' bouvier-scribe (chef) de i bceuf regu en dchange
contre deux bceu/s,' which of course is not possible, and without any
sense. Hence we can translate this latter passage only by ' scribe
of the oxen that are one year old, instead of those that are two
years old.'
From this, then, it follows that the oxen (or asses or other cattle)
had to be counted, or better ' booked,' by certain officials, called
DUP-SAR (scribe). Those that were one year old had one
scribe, as well as those that were two years old and that were
already able to till the ground. The old oxen {GUD-^U-Gi), to
which class the GUD-X belong, were ' booked ' by a DUP-SAR
especially appointed for that business, who is called the ' scribe of
the oxen that are ten years old.'
4l6 THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
E. A. H. 96 and 109.
E. A. H. 96 is a case-tablet in the form of a receipt Qu-ba-ti) of
grain, ^u-ba-ti is the common expression for Assyr. imhur, both
of which forms occur already side by side on contract-tablets from
the time of Sargon I. and Naram-Sin; see R. A. iv. No. iii. No. 41-
44; also O. B. I. pi. vi. No. 15. For &V-TI= ma^dru, see Br.
1701 and H. W. B. p. 400 : to receive, i. e, to buy.
The person from which the grain (or any other article) is received
is indicated by KI- . . . -TA, lit. 'from (ia) the estate {fit) of.'
The &U-£A-TIh2i% to be translated here 'passively,' on account
of the GE (tablet, 1. 3), it being a postfix signifying the genitive.
Lugalkagina, the recipient, is, according to the seal, the scribe
{dup-sar) and servant («?'/aJ^) of a certain Atu, who is the PA-AL=
iabril of the king Dungi III. — for this tablet dates from that king's
reign. This seal shows that the ^abril of a king must have been
a very high official of the king. On the case we find the sign
DUB before Lugalkagina. DUB here=' tablet ' ; comp. E. A. H.
27, 12, where we have DUB Ur-(''<«eir') Ghl-alim DUP-SAR-ku.
Lugalkagina lived in Nippur (E. A. H. 109, 5). The date given
on E. A. H. 96 makes him a contemporary of Dungi IIL ; the date
on E. A. H. 109 belongs to the ' uncertain dates ' ; it may there-
fore be very probable that this latter date has to be referred to that
king too.
It will also be noticed that the ' verb ' is left out on the case.
So on all case-tablets. In this way case-tablets are made to be
private transactions, for nobody knows whether the grain was
' bought ' or ' sold.' Hence we find on the cases :
(i) The subject matter (grain, flour, dates, &c.);
(2) The person to whom this 'letter' is directed;
(3) The person from whom (Jii-td) it comes;
(4) Date.
OF. BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS 417
In the enumeration of the GUR and the KA of grain, it will be
noticed that the sign for GUR always follows the kE. The sign
for KA generally is not given, but whenever it is given it precedes
the sign for SE. Where the numeral of the GUR ends, and
where that of the KA begins, can only be distinguished by the
writing of the numerals themselves. ■ The full expression of E. A. H.
96, 1. I, would be : —
3x60 + 30 + 2 I 120 (see A. B. P. R. p. 100) + 30 {=AS) KA se
GUR lugal, i.e. 212 GUR \ 150 KA se-lugal.
The tablets read : —
4t8
THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
E. A. H. 96.
Case.
ff«»:S
dF^^h^%^
rrr^«-f^^mfei^ 4M^^^^^^
•X ^
^^^^s^ttJr
j^ ^> ^=^^f-^'- ^
Tablet.
Obverse.
Reverse.
#^^>^W5^
^^ >sK
or BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS
419
E. A. H. 96.
Case.
212 gur 150* {ka) h-lugal 212 gur 150 ka of grain, royal
quality,
ki-UrAdingir-) En-zu-ta from Kalbi-Sin.
DUB Lugal-ka-gi-na-ha Tablet of Lugalkagina (&c. were
received).
Itu (*«-r'»-) Ne-sti Month (of the festival of) Nesu,
6 mu a-du-II-ham-ru Kar-har The year when (the king) de-
ha-^ul vastated Karhar for the second
time.
Seal.
A-tu
Pa-al lugal
Lugal-ka-gi-na
dup-sar
nita^-zu
(O) Atu,
shabrfi of the king,
Lugalkagina,
the scribe,
(is) thy servant.
Tablet.
212 gur 150 ka of grain, royal
quality,
frorii Amil-Sin,
by Lugalkagina
were received.
Month (of the festival of) Nesu,
mu a-du-II-kam-ru Kar-har The year when (the king) de-
ha-^ul vastated Karhar for the second
time.
212 gur 150 (^a) h-lugal
ki'Ur-^<^'''snr) En-su-ta
Lugal-ha-gi-na-ge
lu-ha-ti
Itu (iineir) Ne-sk
' 150 is writtpn 1 v. (>o ■•t A^ ; A& " yi \ Meissner, A. B. P. R. p. 100.
E e 2
420
THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
E. A. H. 109.
Obverse.
m^m^^
^<m^^ ti>r
ll^i^N'F^
Ms^ >4-<
Reverse.
1 80 gur se-lugal
ki-U-ma-ni-ta
L ugal-ka-gi-na-ge
lu-la-ti
5 iag En-lil-'^i
Itu Ki-kin (/)-'i'ngir ]Sfin-a-zu
mu en nam-? (*'«.?'''■) Dungi-ra-ge
ha-DUba-tug
180 gur of grain, royal quality,
from Umani,
by Lugalkagina
were received.
Nippur,
in the month Abu,
in the year when (the king) was
appointed and invested high-priest
of the cult (?) of Dungi.
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS /\2l
E. A. H. 87.
This tablet states that Lugalkagina (see preceding tablets)
received from a certain Ur-Nigin-gar :
ZID-SE-lugal, i. e. wheat-flour, of royal quality.
ZID, flour (Assyr. Mmu, H. W. B. 586).
GIG. This GIG we have found already in the C6ne of Ente-
mena, iii. 8 : En-an-na-tum pa-te-si Si'r-la-pur-^'-ge gan M-GIG-ga.
For GIG, Br. 9235, which occurs again on E. A. H. 95, 2 : '3 gur
GIG,' on both of which places it is mentioned after ZID, see
above, p. 325, i.
GAk-TIN {sic). The second sign is not ffAR-, for that is
written differently (comp. O. B. 1. 125, rev., 10), but TIN{Bi. 9852).
G A&-TIN = GI&-TIN {com^. Z. A. i. i85)=fer««««(Br. 5156;
H. W. B. 355) = sesam-wine.
NI-NVN. NI=lamnu, 'oil' (Br. 5325) + i\^tW= ^m«7«
(Br. 5349 ; H. W. B. p. 280) =nt«on, ' butter.'
This tablet must be read : —
422
THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
Obverse.
:p^^#f
Reverse.
7
8
9
10
^^^M^i#
^^ Mf— C
^^~^m-
^ma'
52 gUr 180 ka of wheat-flour,
royal quality,
1 5 gur 1 56 ka of flour,
I gur 90 ka of Spelt,
294 ka of sesam-wine,
1 2^ ka of butter,
from UR-NIGIN-GAR
by Lugalkagina
were received.
In the month of the great festival
of the year when (Bur-Sin II.) was
invested lord of Eridu.
' The ka is remarkable. Should we read here = Kalbi-NIGIN-GAR, and
translate ' the servant of (god) Nigingar ' ?
52 gur 180 (ka) zid-h-lugal
15 gur 156 la zt'd
I gur 90 {ka) GIG
29J ka GA^-TIN
5 i2i kaNI-NUN
ki-UR-NIGIN-GAR-ka '-ta
Lugal-ka-gi-na-ge
lu-ba-H
Itu EZEN-MAG
10 mu en Eridug-''' ba-tug-ga
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS 423
E. A. H. 27.
This tablet states how many gur and ka of flour {ZID) were
sent {mh-a sig-ga) by different people {Kl-ta) to Nippur.
MA-A = clippu ; SIG-GA = ' to be full.' Hence MA-SIG =
a shipful = shipload = cargo.
1. 8. The IP-U$ are some kind of officers. IP, Br. 10484 =
Idgitiu. In ii. R. 34, No. 3, 32, we have la-gi-tn i-sii-H, which
according to Scheil, Rec. Trav. xix. p. 55, is ' h chef de la fete.'
Ldgittu then would ht=ldgin-tu, and IP=Ldgitiu (fem.) and Idginu
(masc). In this sense IP is pronounced = URA&, S". 2, 4;
H. W. B. p. 373. The URA&-U& then would be the mighty
{U^) Idginu. In Z. A. xii. p. 267, the IP-U& is parallel to the
NAM-PA-AG. That tablet reads:
IP-U& il NAM-RA-AG For the IP-U& and the NAM.-
RA-AG
9 GUR 180 KA KA^-^IG 9 gur 180 ka of fine date-wine,
36 GUR 4x60 + 50+10 {sic 36 gur 300 {sic) ka of common
in copy) KA KA&-DU date-wine
IP-U^-ME for the IP-U^
5 UD-i-ta UD-22-^'"" from the first day to the twenty-
second day.
It is evident therefore that the IP-US as well as the NAM-RA-
AG are officers. Comp. also above, under Alusharshid. The
MK at the end of this line signifies the plural; comp. R. A. iii.
P- '34 • —
120 KA^ 120 ZIB 2 KA ZAL
U& AN-&A-AN-!'' ME
i. e. to the slaves from Anshan; and Gudea, Cyl. B, xi. 11, 12 : —
dumu-nita^-'j (<''"£'^) Ba-u ME
banda en (''^V ''»■) Nin-gir-su-ka ME
424
THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
(Thureau-Dangin, R. A. iii. p. 137, 1. 71). We should expect here :
Kl-ip-us pa-te-si-me- TA .
The Gin in 1. 13 seems to have been an officer resembling very-
much a ' quarter-master.' He had to look after the food of the
royal officers as well as that of the priests, and even of the royal
flocks.
Obverse.
Reverse.
rr^^-^^^g^r
J ^mr
rm
13
Seal.
^ u tim^
fa ■» Jll4ggs
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS
425
E. A. H. 2.7.
132 gur 150 (kd) zid-lugal
hi- Ur-E-ninnH-ta
75 g''^^ ii*} ka zid
M-A b-ha-kal-la-ta
5 27 gur 240 (kd)
ki-{ Gd)lu- Gu-la-ta
12 gur
Ip-us pa-te-si-me
S-j gur 148 ka
10 ki-Sanga i^'^e^r) Ga-lum-
dug-ta
mh-a sig-ga En-lil-ki-ku
DUB UrM^si") Gal-alim dup-
sar-ku '
Gir Ur-Ab-ba
Itu Ezen-^^i«s'*-^ Ne-su
15 mu Bur-(<''"i^'') Sin lugal
132 gur 150 ka of flour, royal
quality,
from Ur-Eninnfi,
75 gur 117 ka of flour
from Abbakalla,
27 gur 240 ka
from (Ga)lu-Gula,
12 gur
from the IP-US of the patesi,
57 gur 148 ka
from the priest of Gatumdug,
cargo to Nippur.
Tablet of Ur-Galalim, the scribe.
The Gir Ur-Abba.
In the month of the festival of
Nesu,
in the year when Bur-Sin became
king.
Seal.
U^jjiingir) Gal-alim
dup-sar
dumu (Gd)lu-^^'«e*'-') Nin-gir-su
' The KU here is noteworthy.
Ur-Galalim,
scribe,
the son of {Ga)lu-Ningirsu.
426
THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
E. A. H. 54.
This tablet gives an account of the grain (Jf«) belonging to {ra)
Ur-Ba'u (1. 14), stating how many gur and ka were given to the
several houses {e) of certain persons. Besides the SE are also
mentioned the GU-GAL, for which see above, p. 327, i.
The tablet is written in Lulubu. Notice the expression ^^Wa-a-
an in 1. 15. GAL=haM, hence lit. the being {GAL) in the midst
{iag) of {ka) Lulubu, i. e. in the city of Lulubu it was.
1. 2. SAR,'B^. 43^5 = ^'>'^-
In 1. 12, instead of 264 gur, read 266 gur.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Obverse.
Reverse.
■^^wm^^-
>*-
'mrww~^^
'^^^^w^^
"H^
^^W^
'Wm~w^
II
12
13
14
15
16
» i^i ^>T
a-^
W^^^Tf^^
WW^^www^
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS 427
E. A. H. 54.
1C14 gur 120 {ka)h-lugal I04 gur 120 ka of grain, royal
quality,
1 2 gur saf Gi-iab-ba-sig-ga 1 2 gur from the field of Gitabba-
sigga,
^^.jjj-.idineir) jfii for the house of Kalbi-Ramminu.
64 gur 60 {kd) se 64 gur 60 ka of grain
5 E-Lugal-u-hai-lu-e for the house of Lugalukashshue.
Gir Ur-(^i«e^*-'^ Im GIR AmSl-Rammanu.
46 gur se 46 gur of grain,
2 gkr 265 ka gu-gal 2 gur 265 ^a of beans,
E-Dug-gi-ul for the house of Duggiul.
10 38 gur se 38 gur of grain
E-Gu-gu for the house of Gugu.
^u-nigin 264 (sic) ^«r 180 (kd) Total: 264 (read 266) gur 180
se-Jugal ka of grain, royal quality.
lu-nigin 2 gur 265 ka gu-gal Total: 2 gur 265 ka of beans.
^e ' Ur-^^^'^si''') Ba-u-ra Grain for Ur-Ba'u.
15 lag Lu-lu-bu-um-'''-ka gal- In Lulubi (it was).
la-a-an
mu Kiine'r) Bur-^'^^^sir) Sin lugal In the year when king Bur-Sin
Ur-bil-lum-^' mu-^ul devastated Urbillum.
' Notice that the GU-GAL belong to the class of SE !
428
THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
E. A. H. io6.
A receipt i^u-ba-tt) of KIN. This ' kin ' is ' measured ' according
to MA-NA. What KIN s.s such may mean here is not evident.
I would like to take the KIN as another form for SIG, Br. 10781,
SIG being the KIN with gunu-signs. SIG = lipdtu, wool. Comp.
also the first half of the sign in E. C. 465, and the month KI-
KIN (/) ^dinsir) N'in-a-ZU.
In the seal, after dumu Ur-ud (/)-azag-ga, we would expect some
such title as PA E (comp. 1. 3), and translate :
the son of Urudazagga,
the PA of the temple
of Dumuzi
(and) the PA of the temple
of RammSnu.
The name of the PA ^ in I. 3 is apparently Lugaliddazi the
scribe.
Obverse.
Reverse.
^M
!^<ht
,
*Bt:iH
f
fl# M
=t= m
i
&=IhJ:$4^
^(^•H-f^
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS 429
E. A. H. 106.
40 ma-na KIN 40 mana of wool
ki-il-ma-ni-ta from Umani
Pa ^-(A»^>-) Dumu-zi-ge by the PA of the temple of
Dumuzi
"iu-ba-ii was received.
5 Itu Gii-engar-gab-a In the month Arahshamna,
mu-ul-sa Lu-lu-bu-um-'^' ba-^ul one year after (the king) devastated
Lulubi.
Seal.
Lugal-id-da-zi Lugaliddazi,
■dup-sar scribe,
dumu Ur-ud{/)-azag-ga the son of Urudazagga, (the PA
of the temple)
(dingir) Dumu-zt of Dumuzi (I. 3)
pa E and the PA of the temple
(dingir^.j-ffi-fa of Ramminu.
43°
THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
E, A. H. 100, 102.
The arrangement of these two tablets is similar.
1. The amount of grain in the granary being stated first.
The MU-GUB apparently belongs to I. i, and should be
translated : so and so many gur (ka) of grain is on hand [GUB=
nazdzu, ' to be present ').
2. The "sag-bi-ta — ultu ktrht-su, states how much of this was
expended. If it happened that the expenditure exceeded the
amount on hand, this was indicated by DIR (z=. atdrti). So in
E. A. H. 100 : 265 ka of grain only should have been expended,
but instead of that i gur of grain (i gur = 300 ka) left the granary,
hence a deficit {filR) of 35 ka.
3. NIN-^in-AG. For- NIN-^II), see pp. 253; 337,1; 365,
note 36.
AG = epeiu ; and NIN-&IB-A G = epui nikasi, which Thureau-
Dangin, O. L. Z. i. 163, translates by revenus encaissh.
Here however nothing was encaisse, but on the contrary i gur of
grain was expended. Hence it seems better to take nin-h'd-ag in
a more general sense = to transact business.
4. MA-DU-DU, Br. 3698 : malahu.
5. IGI-DU, Br. 9336 if., mahru, asaridu, dltk mahrt.
E. A. H. 100.
Obverse.
Vr^^^^W^^
Y^g
ZSS-S
4^
^^WWW^rw
9
10
ir
Reverse.
y-Mf ^F
{Q-j^^T^^^^^^
'•^(iSfi(Af^
i=0H}^
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS 431
E. A. H. 100.
265 ka h-lugal 265 ka of grain, royal quality —
lag-hi-ta of which,
I gin kuhahbar for i gin of silver,
h-hi I gur on grain i gur
5 Na-ki dumu Ur-Gar igi-du Naki, the son of Ur-Gar, formerly
lu-ha-ti has received —
mu-guh (is the grain) on hand.
Dir 35 ka h Deficit = 35 ka of grain.
Gir Ga-lag-ga Gir Gashagga
nin-lid-ag transacted the business (with ?)
10 Vru-ki-hi dumu Ur-^^'"^''') Utu Urukibi, the son of Ur-Utu the
mh-du-du sailor.
mu'us-sa BAD-Ma-da ba-ru One year after (the king) built
Dfir-Mada.
432
THE E. A. HOFFMAN COLLECTION
E. A. H. I02.
Obverse.
>^H-
^ t^
m-w^^i^r
5^;&^&=T>^>#^
MiS^ '^^
Reverse.
■^? '^
W^
^
6 gur 46|- ka le-lugal
sag-bi-ta
6 gur 46f ka
Ba-al-ni-ni
5 su-ha-H
mu en (*'"^''') Uru-ki mas-e
ni-pad
mu-gub
Gir Ba-al-ni-ni
nin-hd-ag
10 (Ga)lu-ka-ni dumu Ur-^^ioe"-)
Ba-u
mu Sa-ahru-f'' ba-gul
6 gur 46-! ka of grain, royal
quality —
of which
6 gur 46f ka
Balili
has received
in the year when the king was
declared by a decision to be the
high-priest of Nannar —
is the grain on hand.
Gir Balili,
transacted the business (with ?)
(Ga)lukani, the son of Ur-Ba'u.
In the year when the king devas-
tated Shashru.
OF BABYLONIAN CLAY-TABLETS
433
E. A. H. no, III (comp. also Pognon, Le Mus^on, 1892,
p. 253, No. ii.).
The inscription on these two pieces is stamped upon sun-dried
bricks. They came, according to Dr. Body, from Nippur. Ai-nun-
Tta-J'', the city where Ur-Nin-gii-zid-da was patesi, must therefore be
sought in the neighbourhood of that city, and thus Scheil's state-
ment (Rec. Trav. xix. p. 55, No. ii), ^ le site de cette ville tiesi pas
h trap grande distance de Niffer,' is corroborated. The writing
Al-nun-na-ak or I^{AB)-nun-nak, which also occurs, would point,
however, towards Elam. Notice also ^'''"^''-) Tl^PAKl The
patesi of that city, although bearing a Sumerian name (Ur-^'^'"S''')
Nin-gii-zid-da, i. e. the servant of the lord of the tree of life), was
a Semite, or at least spoke Semitic-Babylonian, otherwise he would
have used for NA-RA-AM the Sumerian KI-A G. The name of
the god is not 'J^'^ff''-) U+DAR = Fstar (so Pognon and Pinches,
B. O. R. 1892, B. vi. No. 3, p. 67), but C*"^^'-) Tiipak (Br. 3022),
i.e. Ninib, who was, according to iii. R. 66, the god of Ashnunna !
The inscription reads : —
F f
434 ^^^ ^- ^- HOFFMAN COLLECTION
Ur-'^^'"S'*'') Nm-gis-zid(s\c)-da Ur-Ningishzidda,
na-ra-am the beloved
{dingir) ji^PAK of Ninib,
pa-te-si the patesi
Ahnun-na-*' of Ashnunna.
Besides the above-given inscription, Pognon, I. c, has published
also three others, giving us the names of three more patesis — all
of whom may have been contemporaries of the kings of the
fourth dynasty of Ur. For a translation of the inscriptions, see also
Pinches, I.e. They read: —
Musdon, 1892, p. 253, No. iv,
[. . .]ma-M
[na-ra-]am
[(*'"i"»] TJ&PAK
[_pa-te-^si
[Ai-nun-'\na-^'
Ibid. No. iii. Ibid, No. i.
Til(f)-la-ku I-ba-al-pi-el
na-ra-am na-ra-am ^tngir) TI$PAK
{dingir) TI&PAK patesi
pa-te-si Al-nun-na-¥
AH-nun-na-^'
INDICES
I. PROPER NAMES
[d. = dupsar ; dr. = daughter of; e. = engar (p. 410 a); f. = father of ; g. = gir
(P- 424) ; g<J- = grand-daughter of ; k. = king of,- n. = niku (p. 414/) ; n. b. g. =
nu-banda-gud (p. 411 rf) i "g- = "^gid (P- 4" *) ; nin = lady ; nt. = note ; O. =
Obverse; p. - patesl of (p. 55, 4) ; pa = ovetseer (p. 411 e); R. = Reverse;
s. = son of; sh. = shepherd ; S. = Sabrfi ; w. = wife of.]
A-a-ud-bu-kn, sh., 375, 26.
Ab, n., 353, 20; 359, O. 8; 361,0. 8.
Ab-ba, e., 383, 21; pa and 11. b. g.,
4". 5-
Ab-ba-gin-na, sh., 400; 401, 14.
Ab-ba-kal-la, 425, 4.
Abi-i-sir, d., 173, i.
Abraham, 1, 321.
A-da, ng., 353, 26.
Ad-da, 373, Ji ; pa, 375, 27.
Ad-da-mu, 363, 16.
A-kur-gal, s. Ur-NinS, k. and p.
Shirpurla, 12, 14, 65, 66, 68, 73, 85,
87 nt., 93,94; 145, i; 213.
A-la(?)-nru, 353, 16.
Al-la, 15s nt. ; pa and n. b. g., 412,4,
Al-la-mu, s. Ur-Sag-ga-mu, p. Girsu(!)
212,1; 245, 246, 248.
Alu-u§ar5id, k. Kish, 18, 23, 125-129,
178, 214. See also Uru-mu-u§.
Al-zu-zu-a, k. Kish, 17; 82,4; 213
(comp. Zu-zu).
AmaT-?-a, f. Ur-Wi°e") KAL, 353, 29.
F
AMAT-, Me Gin-.
Amraphel, see Hammurabi.
An-a-an, see Ilvi-ma.
A-na-mn, 409, 15.
A(!)-nam-uru-na, e., 413.
An-ba-ni-ni, k., 176, i.
A-ne-mi, e., 412.
A-ni-knr-ra, s. Ur-Nina, 68.
A-ni-ta, 66, 68.
An-ki-sa-a-ri, k. Karhar, 259, 27.
An-ni, 409, 9.
An-nu-ba-ni-ni, k. Lulubi, 127, 175-
178; 263,47 a.
Apil-Clin) IJtar, s. Ilu-ba-ni, 171 nt.
Apil-Sin, k. Babylon, 30.
Ardi-(U") Na-bi-um, 229.
Ardi-Naram-Cl") Sin, 261, 42.
Arioch, see Rim-Sin.
Ar-tak-5at-su, k. Babylon, 332.
A-tu, 5., 323, 416, 419.
f. Ur-W^e'^J Ba-u, 400; 403, 29.
f. Ur-Gu-la, 353, 18.
f. Ur-W'"eif) KAL, 365, 25.
Azag-, e., 412.
A-zi-da, f. Lugal-uru-da, 363, 3, nt.
f 2
436
INDICES
B.
Ba-al-ni-ni, 363, 5 ; 432, 3 ( = Bal-ili?).
Ba-a-mu, f. Lugal-a§(?)-tur-ri, 350.
Ba-lip, 66, 68.
Bar, s. Ug-me-uru-sag, 405, 12.
Bar-ru, e,, 383, 32.
Cdingir) Ba-u-nin-a-an, 37, 237.
Ba-zi, k. Al, 30, nt. i.
Ba-zig-gi, sh., 373, 14; 400; 403, 20.
Bel-nballi-it, d., 312, nt. 4; — 330.
Bi-ga-ni-5ai-ali, 173.
Bi-in-ga-ni-5ar-Etli, s. Naram-Sin, k.
Agade, 23, 173, 175.
Bil-gur, 227, 228.
Bur-na-bu-ri-ia-a§, k. Babylon, 328.
(dingir) Bur-WineW Sin I., k. Isin, 26, 29 ;
168, 8; 230, 231.
(dlDiir) Bnr-('i'i'Bir) Sin II., k. Ur, 27-29 ;
168, 8 ; 230, 2 ; 240-247, 249, 253,
266-275, 316, 322, 325, 333, 359, 361,
376. 379. 387. 389. 391. 395. 397. 399>
410, 425, 427.
ij.
Darius, k. Babylon, 331.
Dingir-a-an, see Ilu-ma.
Du-du, high priest of Ningirsu, 117.
Dug-ga-zid-da, pa, 352, 2 ; 355,- R. 9.
f. Ur-Wi"eii) Dumu-zi, 353,- 9.
Dug-gi-ul, sh.,- 405, 14; — 427, 9i
Dun-gi or Mingir) Dnn-gi I., k. Ur, s.
Ur-Giir, 21, 29; 37, i; 39, 144;
168, 8; 211, 212, 215, 217, 218, 223-
225, 228, 229, 234 ; 237, I ; 239, 242,
249, 311.
Dun-gi or Wingir) Dun-gi II., k. Ur, 22,
26, 28, 29 ; 37, I ; 144, 211, 212, 234-
236, 239, 240, 243, 249.
(dingir) Dun-gi III., k. Ur, 27, 28, 29 ;
37. i; 144. 212. 234; 237.1; 238-
251; 264, 48; 265, 50*; 282, 286,
312, 315. 333. 416.
Dun-gi, 237, I.
(dingir) Dungi-bani, 315, i.
Dungi-ili, 315, i.
(dingir) Dun-gi-zi-kalam-ma, 315, i.
E.
E-an-na-tum, s. Akurgal, k. and p.
Shirpurla, 12, 71-95, 99, 113, 121;
122, I ; 126, 129, 144, 153, 213, 220,
308, 309-
E-gi§-mi, e., 412.
En-i-kal-li, f. Ur-lum-ma, p. Gishuh,
k. TE, 75 ; 94, I ; 100.
En-an-na-tum I., s. Akurgal, p. Shir-
purla, 13, 14, 72, 95, 103, 116, 117,
144.
En-an-na-tum II., s. Entemena, p.
Shirpurla, 13, 119, 12O; 122, i;
144.
En-an-na-tum, a. Ishme-Dagan, 25, 26,
29, 234, 239. 312-
En-ge-gal, k. Shirpurla, 16, 54, 144.
Enim-Wi"B''') Ba-u, n., 393, 12.
En-ne-Ugun, k. Kish and Uh(?), 17,
121-124, 126; 151, l; 213.
En-5ag-ku§-an-na, lord of Kengi, 43, 45,
121 ; 122, I ; 144, 213, 217, 219.
En-teme-na, s. fji-an-na-tum I., p.
Shirpurla, 13,96-119; 122,1; 123;
125, 2 ; 126, 144, 220.
Eri-Aku, see Rim-Sin.
Erin-da, 173.
Eri-Wineir) Uruvki, s. Ur-Wnsir) Dun-
pa-ud-du, 240, I.
E(?)-ud-bu, s. Ur-Nina, 68.
E-zi, ng., 389, 7.
E-zu-ab, k. Gishuh, 23; 150, 4.
G.
(Ga)lu-W°EW An, e., 413.
(dingir) (Ga)lu-An^na, 317, i.
(Ga)lu-Bal-sag-ga, 363, 9.
(Ga)lu-Wi°6i') Ba-u, 363, 8 ; 393, 12.
f. (Ga)lu-''iinBir) Nin-gir-su, 240,1.
/. PROPER NAMES
437
(Ga)lu-bi-mu, g., 407, 21.
(Ga)ln-dingir-ra, 353, 15 ; d., 40?, 23.
s. Ur-WinsW Da-mu, 405, 3.
f. Ur-MtaeiO Kal, 363, 10.
(Ga)lu-W'''8iiJ Dun-gi, 315, i.
(Ga)lu-W'"'e"J En-zu, f. Ur-Wingjr) Kal,
352, 369.
(Ga)lu-gin-na, 363, 4.
(Ga)lu-(«"eir) GiS-bar-ud-du, 377, 6.
(Ga)lu-Wiiieir) Gu-de-a, 313, i.
(Ga)ln-Gu-la, 425, 6.
(Ga)lu-kal-la, 409, 6.
(Ga)lu-ka-ni I., f. fia'la-Lama, p.
Shirparla, 21, 23, 29, 211, 246, 249.
(Ga)In-ka-ni II., p. Shirpurla, 22, 29,
212, 236, 238, 243, 244, 246, 249.
-^^ s. Ur-(d'"Ei>-) Ba-u, 432, 10.
(Ga)lu-ka-[ni], 353, 11.
(Ga)lu-Ka-sal (= Amgl-Kasalli, 'the
man from Kasallu'), e., 412.
(Ga)lu-Ki-nu-nir-''', 261, 42.
(Gal)u-(4iiiBir) Lagab + inserted igi-gunu
(= god of Gishuh), 240, i ; 325.
(Ga)lu-ligir-e, 237, i.
(Ga)lu-me-ne(lam), 353, 22 ; 359, R. 6.
(Ga)lu-Wi<'6ir) Na-ru-a, (ga)Iu KU, ng.,
353,1°; -373,8-
— f. Ur-Sag-ga, 353, 19.
(Ga)ln-Wi"'eirt Nin-gir-su, s. (Ga)lu-
(dingii^ Ba-u, 240, I.
f. Ur-Mioeir) Gil-alim, 425, 12.
- — g.r4o7, 22.
(dineir) (Ga)Iu-(dine'r) Nin-ib, 317, i.
(Ga)lu-M'"'Bir) Nin-sun, sh., 379, 18.
(Ga)ln-W"B'"')Nin-Sul,409, 13; — e.,4i2.
(Ga)lu-(*i''eir) Pa-sag, e., 412.
(Ga)Iu-Sir-pur-la-''', 261, 42.
d., s. Ur-(^'"BW Nina, 323.
(Ga)lu-W'"Bir) utu, p. Gishuh, 30, i ;
300, III.
(Ga)lu^zi-lnm, 383, 40.
Ga-5ag-ga, g., 431, 8.
gi, e., 383, 43.
(diDjir) Gimil-Mi°gir) Sin, k. Ur, 27, 28,
215, 240 and nt., 247, 249, 274-
278,312; 315, 2; 322.
Gin-WJngir) Dun-pa-ud-du, w. Gudea I.,
210; —327.
Gin-Wingir) Gu-de-a, 313, i.
Gir-ri-a-ab-ba(?), 329.
Gi-tab-ba-sig-ga, 427, 2.
Gu-de-a I., f. Ur-Wingir) Ningirsu, p.
Shirpurla, 20, 23, 31, 39, 144, 187-
210, 220, 244, 246, 247, 295, 297,
301, 304, 310, 311, 313, 321, 322.
Gu-de-a II., p. Girsu (?), 144, 244, 247,
248.
(diniir) Gu-de-a, p., 244, 247. See
Gudea I.
Gu-de-a, 327.
(dingir) Gug-kam, p. Girsu (?), 248, 2 ;
413. (The sign for Gug is not yet
assimilated. It may possibly be read
also AGA, Br. 6949 = agfl.)
Gu-gu, 427, II.
Gu-nam-mi-de (?), p. Gishuh, 75.
Gu-ni-du, f. Ur-Nina, 12, 58, 64-66;
137, 44-
Gnr-sar, f. Gunidu, 12, 58, 61.
Gu-u-mu, 326.
Gu-un-gu-nu-um, k. Ur, 25, 28, 29, 234,
239, 240.
G, H.
H[a-aS-ha-mi-ir, p. Ishkun-Sin, 30, i ;
, 236-
Ga-la-Lama, s. (Ga)lukani I., 21, 23,
29, 39, 211, 212, 218, 225, 249.
Hammurabi, k. Babylon, i, 32, 216,
217, 219, 286, 398, 302 ; 305, I.
Gar(?)-ra-ab-dn, 363, 13.
Gar-sag-ku-al, 66, 69.
6e-5ag-mu, e., 412.
I.
la-lu-un-a-sar, f. Libit-Anunit, 26, 29,
229.
I-ba-al-pi-el, p. Ashnunna, 434.
438
INDICES
Ib-ni-sarri, d., 155 nt.
(dingir) i.din.(dinEir) Da-gan, k. Isin (?),
27> 29, 231, 232, 249, 312.
Igi-Sag-§ag, e., 413.
Ih-5i-ia-ar-5i, k, Babylon, 332.
'■ Il-'-e-tu, 330.
Hi or Il-li, p. Gishnh, 96, 105, 106;
122,1; 144.
Ilu-ba-ni, f. ApiK"") IStar, 171 nt.
Ilfl-ma, s. Nab-§e-me-a, 226, 2.
Ilfl-ma-Gis-dub-ba, s. Nab-5e-me-a,
226.
(dingir) j.ne-hiingir) Sin, k. Ur, 2^-29 ;
240 nt.,.249, 278.
Ip-Sa-tdiDBir) En-lil, 261, 42.
Ip-5a-Wingii-) Innanna-Erin-*ii, p. ]ji-
nanna-Erin-", 30, i. (The sign
IP is that mentioned already on
p. 261,42, occurring there in the date
inn e IP sa Ki-Wingir) Da-gan-na ba-ru.
The fact that IP-SA forms here part
of a nom. pr. may make it probable
that we have to take IP-§a-Ki-Wi">eirt
Da-gan-na as one name, i. c. that of
the temple. In this case Ip-Sa would
be parallel to Ur or Ardi, comp. Ur-
Mlnglr) IJi-tdlnglr) Ba-U = Ip-Ja-W'''Blt)
I5i-Da-gan, comp. also Ardi-Naram-
(il") Sin. E. A. H. loi might be
translated : In the year when the
' Ip-sa-15i-W"ei'') Da-gan' — a house for
Dungi— was built. The SAG-GAL
Ip-5a-ISi-Dagan mentioned on E, A. H.
55 (P- 323) shows that if this ex-
planation be correct, Ip-Sa-Ili-Dagan
must still have lived at the time of
Bur-Sin II., for E. A. H. 55 has the
date No. 4 of that king. What IP-
SA when forming nom. pr. means is
not yet certain.)
Ip-5a-(^'°e'f) l5i-Da-gan, 312; 317, i;
261, 42, and above ; 324.
Ir-dug-da, ng., 387, 8.
I-sar-a-(a)-dug, g., 328.
I5-bi-gir-ra, k. Isin, 26, 29, 229.
(dinglr) IJi.Cdlnglr) Ba-U, 261, 43 ; 317, I.
U(?)-mi-l-lum, p. Dun-til-W-la, 30, i.
(dingir; j§.jne-W«e'''J Da-gan, f. Enanna-
tum, k. Isin, 25, 26, 29 ; 168, 8 ; 233.
Itti-(Uu) BSl, f. Sargon I., 155, 169.
I-zi-lum, d., 173.
K.
Ka-da-a5-ma-an-Tnr-gu, k. Babylon,
161, 1.
Kad-di§-man-Tnr-gn, k. Babylon, 208,
2 ; 328, 329. (The same as preced-
ing-)
Kam-bu-zi-ia, k. Babylon, 331.
Kan-du, dr. Ur-Ba'u, nin, 19, 186,
189.
Kashtubilla, 158.
Ki-lul-la-gu-za-lal, ». Ur-Ba-bi, 237.
Ku-dur-dug-mal, 30, 32.
Kudur-Lagamar = (?) Ku-dur-dug-mal,
30, 286.
Kii-dur-nan-hun-di I., 30, 236, 286.
Kudnrnuhgamar, wrong reading for Ku-
dur-dug-mal, see there.
(dtagir.) Ku-dur.ri-Mi"5ir) En-lil ( =Turgu),
k. Babylon, 328.
Ku-ra-a§, k. Babylon, 331.
Ku-ri-gal-zu, k. Karduniash, 168, 8 ;
236.
Ku(?)-uru-('ii"Bir) Utu, k. Ma-uru-",
30, >■■
L.
La-ni-mu, ng., 353, 28.
La-si-ra-ab, k. Guti, 127, 175, 178.
(dingir) Li-bi-it-Anunit, k. Isin, 26, 29,
229,
Lid-da, s. Ur-Ninl, 68, 366.
Li-pu-uS-I-a-um, dr. Na-be-?-mai, 173,
175-
Lugal-an-azag-gi, 400, 401.
Lugal-an-da, p, Shirpurla (),i, 16, 135,
/. PROPER NAMES
439
Lugal-aS(?)-tur-ri, s. Ba-a-mu, 250, 251.
Lngal-bar-zn, ng., 352,
Lugal-da(!)-ak(?), k. Kish, 17 ; 56, 2 ;
121, 2 ; 126, 213.
Lugal-dib-bu, 363, 2.
Lugal-Wnsir) Dun-gi, u., 261, 42;
3i5> I-
Lugal-dur-, 188.
Lugal-engar, e., 413.
Lugal-ezen (or Sir!), 353, 24; 361, R.
9; — e., 412.
Lugal-id-da-zi, s. Ur-iid(?)-azag-ga, 428,
429.
Lugal-ka-gi-na, d., 323, 325, 328, 416,
419-421; 422,5; — ng., 353.
Ltigal-kal-la, f. Ur-fdmgir) AN-MAG,
p. Nippur, 30, I.
L«gal-kar-zi, c, 412.
Lugal-ki-gub-ni-du-dn, k. Ur, 18, 23,
144. 151-153, 214-
Lngal-kisal-si, k. Ur, 18, 23, 145, 150;
153,6.
LBgal-me-ne(lain), 353, 32.
Lugal-ni-iag, pa and n. b. g., 412, 2.,
Lugal-pa-nd-dn, 363, 6.
Lngal-si-kisal, see Lugal-kisal-si.
Lugal-Si-gar-e, s. Sag-da, ng., 353, 12.
Lngal-Sir (or ezen ?), s. Ur-Nina, 66, 68;
— 89, 2.
Lngal-Sug-gur, p. Shirpurla, 16, 56, 74,
121, 142, 179,213.
Lngal-tar-si, k. Kish, 23, 125 and nt. 3,
126, 147, 214.
Lngal-n-kaS-Ju-e, 353, 8; 393, 9;
427, 5-
Lugal-nrn-da, s. A-zi-da, 363, 3.
Lugal-usum-gal, p. Shirpurla, 7, 23,
153, 159, 161, 162.
Lngal-WtagirJ utu, e., 412.
Lugal-zag-gi-si, s. Ukush, k. Erech, 17,
23> 31, 130, i34> 138, i49> 163, ^H,
219,220; 280,4; 308-Jio.
Lug-bar-ge-gid(?)-dul, 66.
Lug-di-ne, 353, 23.
Lum-ma-dur, ». Enannatum IF., 15, i ;
120, 153-
Lu-u-Sag-ga, 353, 4.
M.
Ma-an-iJ-tu-su, k. Kish, 18, 23, 126,
127, 148, 214.
Marduk-zer-ib-ni, 330.
Mgr-Dungi, 315, i.
Me-silim, k. Kish, 15, 55, 74; 98, 8;
99, loi, 121 -^ 122, I ; 126, 142, 148,
i?9. 213; 255, 12.
MU-E-AN-NA, dnmu lugal, 284, 1.
Mu-na-ba-Sag, 365, 27.
Mu-ri-kur-ta, s. Ur-NinS;, 66,-68.
(iiu) Mu-ta-bil, Sakkanaku of Dflj-ilu-k',
30, i; 255, 12.
.... mag, n., 365, 33.
..... ma-Su, p. Ashnunna, 434.
N.
Na-be-?-ma5, s. Naram-Sin, f. Lipu§-
laum, p. Tutu, 173, 175.
Nab-Se-me-a, f. llfl-ma or (and ?) Ilu-
ma-Gi§-dub-ba, 226; 226, 2.
Nabfl-kudur-usnr, k. Babylon, 331.
Nabfl-na'id, k. Babylon, 4, 171, 223,
331-
Nabfl-u-sal-li, 330.
Na-da-tum, 337 and nt., 381.
Na-ki, b. Ur-Gar, 431, 5.
Nam-ga-ni, 324 ; 353,3; 355, R- 8.
s. Ud (?)-a-a-mu, lug, 240, 1.
Nam-mag, 353, 25-
Nam-mag-ni, p. Shirpurla, 19, 23, 39,
185, 186, 189.
Nam-ne-ru-bi-nu-kud(?), 407, 20.
Nam-tum, d., 66.
(iia) Na-ra-am-'U") Sin, s. Sargon I.,
k. Agade, 7, 23, 31 ; 90, 18 ; 160, 3 ;
164-166 ; 168, 8 ; 170, 171 ; 173, 1 ;
175, 176, 214, 215, 219, 284, 308,
310.
440
INDICES
Na-zi-Mu-ru-ut-ta-a5, k. Babylon, 328,
329-
Nergal-5ar-usur, k. Babylon, 331.
.... ne-§u-in-ta, ». Sum-d'O Ma-Iik,
sakkanaku, 154, 2.
Ni-gal-la, 66.
Nina-ku-tur-a, 68.
(dingir) NinS-ma-an-ud-dis, c.,412.
Ni-na-na, pa, 326.
[Nin]-gi§-zi-de-a, 353, 31.
Nin-ka-gi-na, gd. Nammagni, 186.
Nin-kal-la, sh., 409, 3.
Nin-ki5(?)-mi-da-5u,dr. Dungi III., 257,
19.
nun, 363, 30.
Nun-pad, s. Ur-NinS, 68.
N(ir-RammSn, k. Larsa, 30, 286.
P.
Pi-il-ip-su or Pi-li-ip-su, k., 321, 332.
R6sh-Ramman, k. Apirak, 158.
Rim-Sln, k. Larsa, 286, 321, 328.
Sag-an-tug, 68.
Si-a-tum, 236.
Ci") Sin-g^mil, k. Erech, 29, 225, 226 ;
312, 2.
'U") Sin-g4§id, k. Erech, 29, 225, 228;
312, 2.
Sin-i-din-na, 30, 286.
Sin-muballit, k. Babylon, 30.
Sumuabi, 286.
Sumalan, k. Babylon, 30.
§ag-da, f. Lngal-gi-gar-e, 353, 12.
Samas-nSsi-ir, 330.
Sama5-5nm-uk!n, k. Babylon, 330, 331.
Sar-ga-nl-5ar-ali or '!'") Sar-ga-ni-gar-ali
(only once) (= Sar-ge-na of NabQ-
na'id), s. Itti-Bel, k. Agade, 7, 23,
127, 154-164, 167, 169, 170, 17s,
176, 178, 179, 214, 289, 308-310.
§ar-la-ak, k. Guti, 159, 160, 176.
Sar-ru-i§-da-gal, d., 165.
Sibir, k., 329.
Su-e(?)-a-ni-§a, ng., 353, 27.
Sum-("") Ma-lik, f. . . . , ne-5u-in-ta,
^ 154, 2-
.Su-na, sh., 400 ; 403, 33.
T.
Tig-gil, sh., 400; 401, 5.
Til(?)-la-ku, p. Ashnunna, 434.
.... turn, 66.
U.
Ud (?)-a-a-mn, f. Nam-ga-ni, 240, i.
U-dug-?, p. Kish, 55, 2 ; 131, i ; 215.
Ug-me-uru-sag, f. Bar, 405, 12.
U-ku§, f. Lugalzaggisi, p. Gishuh, 130,
^ 132, 214.
U-ma-ni, 420, 2 ; 429, 2.
Ur-, 412.
Ur-ab-ba, g., 425, 13.
Ur-Wingir) Al-la, 365, 26.
Ur-(<"°si>) AN-MAG, s. Lugal-kal-la,
p. Nippur, 30, I.
Ur-Ba-bi, f. Ki-lul-la-gu-za-lal, 237 ;
— 326.
Ur-Mingir) Ba-u, p. Shirpurla, 19, 23, 31,
39, 144, 181-185, 310, 321, 322-
Ur-Wi-eir) Ba-u II., =. Bur-Sin II., 38,
29, 144, 274, 312,3.
Ur-WineiD Ba-u, dumu patesi, 246 ; —
327. 427-
d-. 349. 351-
s. A-tu, 400, 403, 29.
f. (Ga)lu-ka-ni, 432, 10.
f. Ur-(di°eiiO Nina, 324.
s. Uru-dur-dur, 245.
Ur-da, d., 165.
Ur-W'nB'') Da-mu, f. (Ga)lu-dingir-ra,
405. 3-
/. PROPER NAMES
441
Ur-Wtoefr) Dumu-zi, i. Dug-ga-zid-da,
363. 9-
(dingir) Ur-Wnslf) DuD-pa-ud-du, 317, I ;
327-
Ur-Wioe'r) Dun-pa-ud-dn, f. Eri-Wingir)
Uru-ki, 240, I ; — 405, 9.
Ur-dingir-ra, 326.
Ur-E, p. Shirpuria, 20, 23, 153.
Ur-E-Innanna-ge, 16 ; 261, 42.
Ur-E-ninnfl, 261, 42 ; 349, 351 ; 425, 2 ;
— gal, 383, 46-
Ur-Wi"Blr) En-lil, dam-kar-gal and p.
Nippur, 30, I ; 44, 4 ; 410.
Ur-W'nsir) En-zu, 419, 2.
(dinslr) Ur-Wi"eir) En-zu-na, 317, i.
Ur-MiBSir) Gil-alim, d., 416, 252.
d.,s.(Ga)ln-W'''Si"-)Ningirsn,425,i2.
Ur-gan-ne (bil), c, 413.
Ur-Gar, sh., 379, 24; — p., 248, 2; 327;
— pa, 383. 44-
f. Na-ki, 431, 5.
Ur-Gi5-mar, sh., 405, 7.
Ur-Gu-la, u., 339; 359, O. 9; 361,
O. 10; 400; 403, 24.
s. A-tu, 353, 18.
Ur-Gnr I., k. Ur, 24, 29 ; 37,1; 39,215,
217, 219, 221, 222, 228, 229, 234,
242; 263,46; 311; 317, I.
Ur-Gur II., k. Ur (probably the same
asUr-GurI.).a6, 28,29; 37,1; 234,235.
(dingir) Ur-Gu-ru, 317, I.
Ur-6a-ln-ub, 73, HI- ^•
Ur-(di"Eir) Im, 353, 33 ; — g., 427, 6.
Ur-Wi°eir) Iji.(dinsir) Ba-u, 261, 42.
Ur-M'°Bir) Ka-di, 98, 10 ; 256 nt. ; — sh.,
377, 10-
Ur-Ka-?-ki, 326.
Ur-Wtaeir) KAL.p. Girsu, 27, 245-248 ;
260,343; 264, 47*, 48; 265, 50*;
267, 3*; 304, 312, 327.
•^^^ s. Amar-?-a, 353, 29.
s. A-tu, 365, 25.
s. (Ga)lu-('5'^8ir) Enzn, 352, 369.
s. ,(Ga)ln-dingir-ra, 363, 10.
U-iWiDgir) KAL, e., 381, II ; — 407, 17.
Ur-lum-ma, si. En-i-kal-li, p. Gishuh,
^- TE, 95, I ; ,96, 102, 104, 105 ;
122, I.
Ur-Ma-ira, damkar, 30, i ; 410 ; — pa
andn. b.g., 412, 3.
Ur-WioBir) NE-SC7,p. Gishuh, 1 11, 248;
300, III.
Ur-Nigin-gar, 327 ; 363, 14; 421 ; 422, 6.
Ur-(<Jingir) Nina, s. Gunidu, k. Shirpnrla,
12, 56-58, 61, 64-66, 93, 113, 144,
164, 178, 213, 217, 219, 366; —405,
10.
f. (Ga)lu-Sir-pur-la-W, 323.
s. Ur-W'oei') Ba-u, 324.
f. Ur-§id, 412.
Ur-MiiBir) Nin-gir, 413.
Ur-(di"eW Nin-gir-su, s. Gudea, 20, 23,
39, 145, 210, 244.
priest of Nin3, 37, 237, 244, 245,
249.
Ur-fdi^s'') Nin-gi5-zid-da, e., 412, 413;
— 381, 45-
p. of Ashnunna, 433.
(dingir) Ur-Woeir) Nin-ib, k. Isin, 26, 29 ;
168,8; 230; 312, i; 411.
Ur-('3i''B'0 Nin-sun, p. Shirpuria, 21, 23,
29, 211; 247, I.
Ur-Cdingir) Nin-tu, ng., 353, 7 ; 357, R. 6.
Ur-(dlnfir) Nin-zu (sic), 412, i.
Ur-Cdingir) Nun-gal, dumu patesi, 246.
Ur-Cdingip) Pa-sag, 353, 6 ; — e., 413.
Ur-Sag'ga-mu, f. Allamu, 212, i ; 245.
Ur-.^ag-ga, s. (Ga)lu-('ii'>eW Na-ru-a;
353, 19-
Ur-§id, 353,17 ; 363, >5-
s. Ur-(|"°B'rt Nina, 412.
Ur-ud (?)-azag-ga, f. Lugal-id-da-zi, 428,
429.
Uru-dur-dur, f. Ur-W'°e"') Ba-u, 245.
Uru-ka-gi-na, k. Shirpuria, 47-54, 213.
Uru-kal-la, sh., 373, 18.
Uru-ki-bi, s. Ur-W">eir) utu, 431, 10.
Uru-mu-u5, see Alu-u5ar§id.
442
INDICES
Ur-M'»Bir) utu, f. Uru-ki-bi, 431, 10;
— 363, 7-
p. (?) Ur, 20, 3; 23, 34, 154.
Ur-zag-nd-du, k. Kish, 23, 125 and
nt. 2, 126, 147, 151, 214.
U§, p. Gishuh, 74, 98 ; 122, i.
Ul-mn, pa, 393, 6.
(dingir) Utu-a, s. Ur-, d., 211, 238, 243,
244.
(dingir) utn-ki-ag, 405, 15.
(dingir) Utu-mu, e., 381, 6 ; 412.
(dingir) Utn-5ag-ga, 405, 5.
Z.
Za-ba-si-si, e., 413.
Zu-zu, k. Uh, 82, 89 (comp. Al-zu-zu-a),
11. GODS
ALSO NOMINA PROPRIA AND CITIES PRECEDED BY THE
SIGN FOR DINGIR {ILU).
A.
'"») A-E, 160.
(dingir) AGA, see n.pr. (dingir) GUG-kam.
ilu A-ga-de-", 7, 165, 166.
(Uu) A-GUR, 252.
(dingir) Al-la, see n. pr. Ur-t^ingir) Al-la.
So probably also li. R. 57, 710;.
AMAR-UD, Bur-Sin II. was wor-
shipped as the MUL-AMAR-UD, 316.
(dingir) An, see n. pr. (Ga)Iu-('Sineir) An.
(dingir) An-mag, see u. pr. Ur-(*i"sir)
An-mag.
An-na, 132, 202, 204, 209, 211, i ; 250,
256, 2S7, 267, 280, 281, 291, 296, 302.
See also n. pr. (dingir) (Ga)lu-An-na.
An-nat (?), 177.
An-nu-um, 177. Seeaisou. pr. An-nu-ba-
ni-ni.
(iin) A-nu-ni-tim, 160. See also n. pr.
(dingir) Li-bi-it-Animit (Iltar).
(iin) A-nu-um, 330.
B.
di") Bab-il "-", see (^'"sir) Ka-dingir-ra-ti.
(dingir) Ba-u, 44, 4; 50, 53, 65 ; 182, I ;
202-205, 207-209, 288, 295, 297, 298,
[n. pr. = nomina propria.]
301 ; 311, 2; 315, 365, 423. See
also n.-pr. (dingir) Ba-u-nin-a-an, Enim-
(dingir) Ba-u, (Ga)lu-(«i''Bir) Ba-u, Ur-
Ba-bi (always without dingir), Ur-
(dingir) Ba-u, Ur-ti^'neir) IJi.(dlnglr) Ba-U.
("») Bel, see. Wingir) En-lil and n. pr.
Itti-(iin) Bel.
<"") Beltum (B61it), see (dingir) Nin-lil.
(dingir) Bur-('"'>eir) Sin, 11. pr.
D.
(dingir) T>a-gan,see n. pr. Ip-Sa-Ki-(«°B'r)
Da-gan, 261, 42.
(dingir) Dam-gal-nun-na, 234.
(dingir) Da-mu (Br. 6662 = Ba-u), see
n. pr. Ur-('»"Bir) Da-mu.
Dingir-(ra), see n. pr. (Ga)lu-dingir-ra,
Ur-dingir-ra.
(dingir) Dumu-zi, 288, 297, 298, 301,
411, 429. See also u. pr. Ur-tdioeir)
Dumu-zi.
(dingir) Dumu-zi-zu-ab, 84; 182, i.
(dingir) pun^ jgc n. pr. (dineir) Dun-gi and
P- 311, 2.
(dingir) Dun-gi, 288, n. pr. See also the
compositions : (dingir) Dun-gi-ba-ni-
//. GODS
443
(dingir) Dun-gi-ili, winsir) Dnn-gi-zi-
kalam-ma, (Ga)lu-(|'i"'eir) Dun-gi,
Lugal-W^elr) Dun-gi, Mer-M'oeW jjun-
gi, and especially p. 315, 1 ; and
C. T. No. 13939.
(dingiv) Dnn-gur, 92, 18; 108, 118 and
nt. I ; 308, I ; or Cdingir) Dun-gnr-
an, 115, 116, 118 (W™*) Dun + AN +
gur), 308, I.
(diiiBir)Dun-pa-ud-du, 312; 314,2. See
also n. pr. Gin-W^eir) Dun-pa-od-du,
Ur-WioBir) Dun-pa-nd-dn.
(dineir) Dun-iag-ga,49, 53> 19°, 195. i9<i-
(dineir) En-, 178, 233.
(dingir) En-gubur-ra, 233.
(diuilD En-ki, 80; 81, i; 84, 95, io8,
"4, i32> 172, 182, 224, 232, 270;
275. 2 ; 308, 327-
(dinglr) En-lil, 14 ; 30, 1 ; 44, 45, 50, 51 ,
et passim ; written also
(diniir) En-lil-la, 118,123, 124; or
(dioBir) En-lil-la(l), 19, 21, 22; 89, 22;
99, loi, et passim; or
(dingir; En-lil-li, 107, log, 119, 123, 135,
152, 191, 278, et passim. See also
II. pr. Ip-ia-M'°sir) En-lil, Kad-dis-
man-Tur-gu ( = Enlil), (di»gir) Ku-du-
ri-CdlDgir) En-lil (= Turgu), Ur-(<"neir)
En-lil.
(diagir) En-temen[-an], 118 ; 308, i.
(dingir) En-zu, 8i , I ; 133; 180, I. See
also n. pr. (Ga)lu-(^'''8''') En-zu, Ur-
(dinglr) En-zn.
(dingirj En-zu-na, see u. pr. Ur-Waeiri
En-zn-na.
(dingir) Gal-alim, 49, 51, 190. See also
a. pr. Ur-Woeir) Gil-alim.
(dingir) Gal-dim-zu-ab, 106.
'dingir) Ga-tum-dug, 58, 64, 65, 115,
116, 190, 310, 425.
(dingir) Gim-nun-ta-iid-du-a, 54.
gir, 52.
(dingir) Gi5-bar-ud-du, see n. pr. (Ga)lu-
(dingir) GiS-bar-nd-dn.
Gi5-dub-ba, see u. pr. Ilu-ma-Gi§-
dub-ba.
Gi§uh, god of, see (dingir) Lagab + in-
serted igi-gunfl.
(dingir) Gu-de-a, 312 ff. See also n. pr.
(Ga)lu-C'J'°sW Gu-de-a, Gin-('J'°B'rt
Gu-de-a.
(dingir) Gug, see n. pr. (dingir) Gng-kam.
Gu-la (always without dingir), see n.
pr. (Ga)lu-Gu-la, Ur-Gu-la.
(«") Gu-ti-im, 176.
I.
Ilu, see n. pr, Ilu-ba-ni, Ilfl-ma, IW-
ma-Gi§-dub-ba, Il-ma-i-lum, and
also su[> dingir-(ra) .
(dingir) ini, 327, 429. See also u. pr.
Ur-(*inelr) Im.
(dingir) Im-gig-gu-bar-bar, 182, 1 ; 183,
185, 195-
(dingir) Im-pa-ud-du, 53.
(dingir) j.ne- (dingir) Sin, n. pr.
(dingir) Innanna, 90, 94, 133; 180, i;
182, I ; 199, 200, 201, 222, 230,236,
237, 268, 273, 279, 280, 295, 301,
302, 327-
(dingir) Innanna-ka, ' goddess of Innanna,'
84. Comp. also
(dingir) Innanna nin (dingir) Innanna, ' In-
nanna, the mistress of the divine I.,'
125, 3. See also n. pr. Ur-E-In-
nanna-ge.
(dingir) Innanna-edin, 44, 4 ; 87 note,
410.
(dingir) Innanna-Erin-'i, see 11. pr. Ip-
ja-(din6ir) Innanna-Erin-ki.
(dingir) iji.(dingir) Ba-u, n. pr. See n. pr.
Ur-(d'i'Blr) Isi.(dlngir) Ba-u.
tdingir) isi-Da-gan, n. pr. See n. pr.
Ip-§a-(<""Birt ISi-Da-gan.
444
INDICES
(dinsir) i§.me-Winsir) Da-gan, n. pr.
(U") IStar, i6o, 3; 169, 172, 177; 180,1;
183,1; 226; 255,12. j>« oto ('""bW
Innanna, and n. pr. Apil-du) Ijtar,
rdingir) Li-bi-it-Anunit (IStar).
K.
Cdingir) Ka-di, 98, 355. See also n. pr.
Ur-Wingir) Ka-di.
(dingir) Ka-dingir-ra-'l, 161 nt.
(dlnelr) KAL, see n. pr. Ur-Wlieirt
KAL.
(diDgir)Ku-dur-ri-('ii°sirtEn-lil(=Turgu),
n. pr.
Kur-gal, see n. pr. A-knr-gal.
(dingir) Lagab + inserted igi-gunvt = god
- of GiSuh, 28, 97 ; loi, 22 ; 137. See
also n. pr. (Ga)lu-M',°eir) Lagab + in-
serted igi-gunfl.
(dingir) Li-bi-it-Anunit, n. pr.
(dingiri Lugal-ban-da, 226.
(dingir) Lngal-dingir-ri-ne, 235.
(dingir) Lugal-Erim-", 85 (written gal H-
.^ (ga)Iu + dingir-Erim-ka), 113.
(dingir) Lugal-kur-kur-ra, 132.
M.
(tin) Ma-lik, see n. pr. Sum-O'") Ma-lik.
Ma-ma, see u. pr. Ur-Ma-ma (without
dingir).
(ilu) Marduk, 133, 30 (written (dingir)
§ID). See also AMAR-UD, Sii-kur,
and Tu-tu.
(dingir) Mar-tn, 411.
(ilu) Mu-ta-bil, n. pr., 30, i ; 255, 12.
N.
(iia) Na-bi-um, see n. pr. Ardi-d") Na-
bi-um.
(iin) Nannar, 225. See also Winsir) Uru-ki.
(iiB) Na-ra-am-t"") Sin, n. pr. See n. pr.
Ardi-Naram-'""' Sin,
(dingir) Na-ru-a, see a. pr. (Ga)lu-<'i'''ei''>
Na-ru-a.
(ilu) Nergal (written ('""eir) NER-UNU-
GAL), 226, 3. See also ('i'°eir) gid-
lam-ta-nd-dn.
(dingir) Ne-si, 287 ; 288, i ; 294, 498,
300, 302, 419, 425. See also n. pr.
Ur-Mingir) Ne-Sii.
(dingir) Nidaba, 132, 133, 308, 310.
(dingir) Nin-, 178.
(dingir) Nina, 58, 61, 62, 64, 66, 68;
82, 4; 84, 87 nt., 93, 94, 97, loi,
102, 105-109, 113, 115, 116, 189,
193, 224, 237, 327. See also n. pr.
Nini-ku-tur-i, (dingir) Nina-ma-an-
ud-di§, Ur-W'orir) NinS.
(dingir) Nin-a-gal, 183, 185, 310.
(dingir) Nin-a-gid-ga-du, 133, 308.
Nin-an-da-gal-ki, 206.
(dingir) Nin-a-zu, 292, 395, 300, 301, 430.
See also (diugir) Nin-zu.
(dingir) Nin-dar-a, 183, i ; 190, 193.
(dingir) Nin-din-dug, 44, 4; 89, 22 ;
410.
(dingir) Nin-gir, see n. pr. Ur-W°E<')
Nin-gir.
(dingir) Nin-gir-su, 14, 19, 31, 33, 48, 51,
53, 58, 66, 68, et passim ;
written (4ingir) Nin-su-gir, 16, 58,
64,66,68, 143, 317;
or (dingir) Su-nin-gir, 16.
See also n. pr. (Ga)lu-Wutir) Nin-gir-
su, Ur- (dingir) Nin-gir-su, and comp.
(dingir) Im-gig-gu-bar-bar.
(dingir) Nin-giS-zid-da, 190, 196,199,307;
211, i; 311, I ; 312, 327. See also
n. pr. [Nin]-gi5-zi-de-a and Ur-
(dingir) Nin-gi5-zid-da.
(dingir) Nin-gubur-ra, 233.
(dingir) Nin-fear-sag, 81, i; 84, 93, 95,
101,106,107,114,118; 133,1; 182,1;
198, 222, 308, 327.
(dingir) Nin-ib, 258 ; and see n. pr. Ut-
(dingir) Nin-ib.
;/. GODS
445
(dinfir) Nin-m-(ni)-si-(an)-na, 202, I. i.
See also Wineir) Nin-si-na.
(dlnglr) Nln-ki, 81, I.
(dlngir) Nin-lil, 37; 89, 22; 125, l;
177; 182, i; 222, 236, 237, 277;
written (dineW Nin-Ul-la(l), 255, 257,
258 ; 275. 2 ; 277.
(dineir) Nin-Mar-id, 59, 14 ; 182, i ; 223,
327. 334. 375. 379-
(diDfir) Nin-sar, 52, 54.
(dlnglr) Nin-si-na, 294, 298. See also
(dinBirt Nin-in-(m)-si-(an)-na.
(dineir) Nin-sun-na, 211, i; 226, 326.
See also n. pr. Ur-(dlneir) Nin-snn.
(dlngir) Nin-§ul-li (1) , 51. See also n. pr.
(Ga)lu-(«°Birt Nin-5ul.
(dlngir) Nin-Uru-um-*'-ma, 224; 269,11.
(dlngir) Nin-zu, See n. pr. Ur-W"sir) Nin-
zn, and comp. (dingir) Nin-a-zu.
(dlngir) Nu-ku-sir-da, 256.
(dlngir) Nnn, see (dlngir) Dam-gal-nun-na.
(dlngir) Nun-gal, j««n. pr. Ur-W'ns'S Nnn-
gal.
(dlngir) Nu-silig-ga, 276, 16.
(iiu) Nuskn, 223, nt. 3.
(dlngir) Pap-nigin-gar-ra, 363, 14. See
also n. pr. Ur-Nigin-gar.
(dlngir) Pa-sag, 85. See a/so n. pr.
(Ga)lu-W«''eir) Pa-sag.
(iin) Ramman, 177. See also n. pr.
Rgsh-RammSn, and comp. (dingU) jm.
(dlngir) Sal-in-si-nsi = (dingir)Nin-in-(ni)-
si-(ah)-na.
("") Sin, 174, 176, 178, 180. See also
a. pr. Apil-«"^ Sin, «>") Sin-gamil,
Ola) Sin-gSSid, and comp. (dingirt En-
zu and Wlngir) Uru-ki.
(dlngir) Su-knr, 302, XI. See also <"">
Marduk.
. . . . Sag . . .,53-
(""> SamaS, 169, 170, 171, 177, 222.
Comp. (dlngir) utu.
("") Sar-ga-ni-sar-ali, 169.
(dlngir) giD, 133.
(dlngir) Sid-lam-ta-ud-du, 133, 30; 224;
237, I-
Tur-gu, see (dingir) En-lil.
(dlngir) Tu-tu, 174, 5. See also (»">
Marduk.
U.
(dlngir) UD-KIB-NUN-W, i6r, i.
(dlngir) UmU, 133.
(dlngir) Urdu-zi, 186.
(dlngir) Ur-Gu-ru, n. pr., 317, I.
(dingir) Uru (for (dlngir) Uru-ki), 256, 16 ;
comp.
(dlngir) Uru-Kar-zi-da, 269, 11.
(dlngir) Uru-ki, 25, 222 ; 226, 2 ; 234,
250, 253, 256, 267, 263 ; 267, 5 ; 377,
293, 325, 432. See also n. pr. Eri-
(dingir) Uru-ki, and comp. ("«) Nannar
and ("°> Sin.
(dlngir) Uru-ki En-lil-", 256.
(dingir) Um-ki-Kar (sometimes also
written TE)-zi-da, 27, 255, 260, 269,
302. See also Kar-zi-da-".
(dlngir) Utu, 25, 76, 77, 83, 95, loi, 132,
133, 137, 161. See also n. pr.
Lugal-('ii'>e'rt Utu, Ur-('"°sir) utu,
(dingir) UtU-a, (dlnglr) Utu-ki-ag,
(dlngir) Utu-mu, (dlnglr) Utn-5ag-ga,
and comp. (""^ Sama§.
(dlngir) Za-ma-ma, 55, 2; 121, I.
also (dlngir) Ma-ma.
(dlnglr) Za-za-ru, 53.
See
446
INDICES
III. BUILDINGS
[For the temples see also under Gods.]
Ab-bi-ru, 113.
ab-dug, 113", nt. to II. 7.
ab-gi, 62, nt. to III. i ; 118, nt. 9.
ab-gi-gi, 118.
ab-Gir-su, 64, 4 ; 64, 6 (ab-Su-gir).
ab-zu, see zn-ab.
alan, 61, 62, 199, 201, 208, 210, 25^
.... an-dug + nagid-ki, 223.
An-ta-sur-ra, 48, 51, 53, 89, 91, 106,
"4,327-
aP-ir, 62 ; 118, nt. 9.
A-RUS, 113, nt. to III. 2.
B.
bad gal e Ur ku ki li bi da tig ? ga,
270, 12.
bad-ki ki-bi ba-ab-gl, 258, 20. See also
Ubara-ii.
bad-kisal, 125, 3. See also kisal, mi-
kisal.
bad-pur + la + Sir, 59, nt. 16; 63 (bad
Sir-pur-la).
bad Uru-azag-ga, 85.
bad Uru-um-iil-ina, 235.
bad-mar-tu mu-ri-ik Ti-id-ni-im, 276, 5 ;
316.
bar, loi, 14 ff.
bit ("") Bel, 162, 171 nt. See also E-
KUR.
bur-ma^, 118.
bur-sag, 50.
bur-§e-gaz, 14.
D.
DIM(?) Nin-an-da-gal-ki, 206.
Dul-nir, 60, 64.
[duppa] ip-u§(?), 176, 119 (mu-na-ni-
§ar).
DUP-PISAN, 198, 205.
(si5) D0R-GAR, 198, 205.
E.
e: e-bi ib-ta-ni-ud-du, loi.
e-ab .... 52, 63, III. I.
e-ad-da im-sig-ga-(ka), 50, 54, 114.
E-an-na, 199, 201, 222, 223, 226.
E-bar-bar, 80, 327.
E-bar-ra, 5a, 171, 222.
e-dam, 59, 65.
edin : min edin mu-ru, 63.
e-gal Mingir) Dun-pa-ud-du, 327.
e-gal Erim-W, 1 1 3.
-e-gal nam-lugal-la-ka, 226.
e-gal Ti-ra-aS-(ka), 48, 51, 53, 65, 92,
327-
e-ge§tin, 2.72.
E-gi5-kin-ti, 160, 3.
e-gi§-me-ra, 49.
E-gi5-5ir-gal, 223.
e-gur-ra kalam'ma, 113.
e-gal-bi, 256.
e-gar-sag, 255.
e-ge-gal-kalam-ma, 49,.5i., 53.
E-gi-li-a-ni-in-ru, 25.
E-gul-gul, 271, 15.
e-igi-ni (written igl-e-ni), 65.
e-igi-zi-bar-ra, 113.
e Ip-Sa-I§i-(*i''6''') Da-gan, 261, 42.
e kalam, 172.
e Kar-zi-da-ka, 224. See also 11; 369,
II ; 270.
e KAS + GAR, 49, 115, J19.
e ki-a-am i-ni-lik, 158.
e ki-akkil-li, 196. See also 49, 53.
///. BUILDINGS
447
E-KUR, i68, 170, 22 2. See also bit
("« Bel.
e lal, 272,
E-lugal-gud-si-di, 223.
E-me-gal-ki5(guS)-an-ki, 50.
e-me-ne(lam)-bi-kur-kur-ra, 49, 52,
114; =
e-ne-bi-kur-kur-ra, 49.
E-MU-RI(?)-A-NA-BA , 277,278.
E-ninnfl, 14, 50, 117, 120; 182,1; 185,
10; 195, 197, 200, 203, 211,
e ni-nun, 272.
E-nun-mag, 235.
E-pa,6i, 23; 63. iV« a/ra cub-imin-na.
e-sa-dug, 50.
E-sal-gil-sa, 224, i.
E-sar-gub-a-ni-in-ru, 25.
E-sil-gid-gid, 204, 209, 210.
= Sag 63.
eS-gu-tur, 182, r.
E-5id-lam, 224, 2^ 23^, i; 242, 244,
254; 312.4-
e-ub-imin-na, 61, 23 ; 203. See also
E-pa.
E-ud-mi-NinS-''i-tag, 1 93.
e-uru-uru-e-ga-ra, 224, 4.
G.
GAG-GI§, 117, 187, l9i>
Gi-gunn, 185, 10; 195, 211.
gi-ka, 114.
Gir-su-W ki-bi mu-na-gl, 85.
Ib-gal, 60, 64.
im-ba-ni, 107.
Im-dub-ba, 105.
I.
K.
Kankal, 226.
Kar-zi-da, 27 ; 269, 11
270.
ki-akkil, 49, 53. See also 196.
ki-di-kiid, 195.
ki-gal, 172.
kisal e-kalam, 172. See also bad-kisal,
mi-kisal.
ki-SIGIS§E-SIGIS§E-ra, 272.
Ki-5ag-gul-la, 270, 271.
KI-U, 60, 21. See also Dul-nir.
KUR-E, 193.
M.
mi-kisal gud .
kisal, kisal.
. , 270. See also bad-
N.
na, 98, 12.
Nam-nun-da-ki-gar-ra, 106, 107.
na-ru-a, 101,4. 6.
nlgin ku-lag-^a zal-da, 1 16.
NinS-W, 85, '94.
R.
RUS, J« A-RUS.
S.
Sa-la-am-Su u sa-lam Ci") IStar, 177.
T.
Te-im-ila, 221, 225.
Ti-a5-ra, 65. See also e-gal Ti-ra-a5-ka.
U.
Ubara-W, 258, 20. See also bad-ki.
uni ( = Ur), 270.
uru (§ES)-ni, 66, 69.
Z.
zu-ab, 270.
zu-ab e-kiir sir-ra, 114.
zu-ab-gal, 64, nt. 4.
zu-ab-tur-da, 64, nt. 4 ; 66, 68, 69.
448
INDICES
IV. CITIES, LANDS, Etc.
A.
Abu-Habba, 154.
Adhem, river, 162.
Aga, mountain, 190, 4. See also Ka-
gal-ad-".
A-ga-de-U (the Biblical HSS, Gen. x.
10), 7. 154. 157, 161 nt., 162, 163,
165, 166, 169, 171, 180, 214, 219,
285. See also Akkad, Bnr-bur, ICi-en-
gi-ki.Urdu, Shumer and Akkad.
A-ldinna, 63, 7.
Akkad = H?^ = LXX. 'A/JxaS (comp.
n3!!")t!>, i_*jjl witti annabu ; Julias
with SD3, kussu ; pB'^'jl, JSOoaJOM
with pbei). See A-ga-de-".
AL, 30, I.
Amanus, mountain, 190.
Am-na-nu-um, 29, 225, 228.
'AiiopSoKaia, 300,V. SeealsoMa.ra.d-da-'^''.
'TJ^S (LXX. Td/ioppa), 58, 6.
Amurru (wrongly read Aharri), 157,
159,163; 190,2. See also Mm-tn-^K
An-Sa-an-ki, in, 192; 255, 12; 259,
260, 282, 285, 300; 314, 2 ; 328,
423.
Apirak, 158, 162, 163.
Arabia, 214; 265, 19 ; 284, 285, 310,
Ar-ma-im-W, 162; =
Armenia, 284, 285.
A-ru-a-U 82, 3 ; 88.
Arvad, 263, 47 a.
A5-nun-na-'" (also written AS-nun-na-
ak, ES-nun-nak), 332, 433.
Az-W, 82, 88, 94, 161, 191 ; =
Azn-pirSni, 88, 12; 155.
B.
Babylon (written KA-DINGIR-
(RA)-") = Bibl. h^^, 220 = Assyr.
Bab-ilj-''S 160, 161, 285, 300, 331.
See also 86, 17; 94, i ; 83, 154, 157,
and 161, I Winsir) Ka-dingir-ra-".
Bad-dingir-W, see Diir-ilu-*'.
Bad-Ma-da-''', 260, 261, 431.
Bahrein islands, 191, 2.
Ba-ra-' (or ah)-se-''i, 128; 255, 12.
Barsip, mountain, 190.
Bar-sip-M, 331.
Ba-ti-ir, 177. See also Fadir.
Borsippa, 321, 332. Comp. Barsip,
Bar-sip-M, and see Ki-nu-nir-*'.
Buranunu, 135. See also Euphrates
and Id-nun.
Bur-bur, 216, 220. See also A-ga-de-".
D.
.... da, 30, I.
Dedan, 190, 2,
Dijal^, river, 162.
Din-tir-W, 95, 1 ; 331. See also Babylon.
Djokha, III. See also Gishuh, Giiban.
Dnn-til-k'-la, 30, 1.
Dflr-ilu-", 30, 1; 98, 10; 156, 163;
255> 12-
Dflr-miti-^', 260. See also Bad-Ma-
da-w.
Ddr-rab-ilu-i', 255.
E.
Eden, 63, 7.
Egypt, 166, 309.
Elamtn-*' (written Nim(-ma)-W), 73,,
75. 85, 91. 94. '28, 129, 156-163,
192, 214, 236; 255, 12; 282, 283,
285, 286 ; 292, I.
En-lil-ki, 30, I ; 124, 168, 170, 224,
230, 231, 254, 332, 420, 425. See
also Nippur.
En lil-W-a, 138; 269, II ; 271, 272.
/F. CITIES, LANDS, ETC.
449
Erech, 17; 44, 3; 130, 145, 15:, 161,
162; 182, I; 214, 225, 226, 228.
See also U^ig-ii-g^, Uruk.
Eridn, written NUN-''', see Urudug-M'
and
Eridug-M, 211, 228, 238, 243, 259;
267, 5 ; 269, 281, 284, 422.
Erim-w, 46, 113, 161 ; 182, i ; 284.
Euphrates, iii, 130, 214, 215, 309.
See aha BuxanuDu and Id^npn.
Gir-su-'i, 46, 51, 63, 64, 85, 88, 105,
161; 182, i; 193, 198, 201, 202,
217, 224, 225, 245, 2S4, 292, 299,
304> 33»> 3S4> 365- Also written
Su-gir, 64, 216. See also Sir-pur-
la-ki.
GiS-ban-''', 74, i ; 213, i. See also,
Gi5-uh-w.
GiSgal-",' 75, 86; 91, 18. See also
URU + inserted A-a-".-
Gi§-uh-M, 15, 2 ; 30, I ; 74, i ;. 76 ff.,
no ft., 129; 279,3; 28g; 300,. III.,
et passim. See also ^arran.
Gi5-uh-*'-a, 79, 28 ; 81, 105, 106, 109.
rS/ioppa., 58,6.
Gubin, 191, I. See also Koptos.
Gu-edin(-na), 75; 82, 2 ; 86, 87 nt.,
88nt.,97, loi, III ff.
Gu-ti-im, 175. Gu-ti-um-ti, 160. See
also 127, 159, 162, 163, 180 ; 292, I,
and Kurdistan.
G, H.
Ha-ar-Si-W, 253, 259, 265, 280, 282,
, 365.
Ga-gum, 190.
niJn, 54, III., 6.
]garran, no, 2; 141, 149. See also
Gii-ban-M and Gi§-uh-^'.
Hn-mur-ti-"!, 245, 265, 280, 283, 365-
Hu-uh-mu-ri-W,74,i ; 268, 283 ; written
also
Hu-hu-nu-ri-ki, 74, i ; 279, 407.
I.
Ibla, mountain, 190., See also Lehanoa.
Idigna, 105, 107, 135. See also Tigris.
Id-nun,,' great: ri>yer'; PHJil "injn, 97 ;
101,. II., i; 107, III; 122, I. See
also Buranunu and Euphrates.
Im-dub-ba, 83, loi, log.
Innanna-ab-W; 96, 105; 160, 3; 161;
written also Ki-Iananna-ab-M, 1 3 1 , 1 3 7.
(Comp. Ki-an-M, Ki-en-gi-^'-Urdu,
Ki-ma§-M, Ki-Wi"s'«-Utu, and Ki-
Unug-W-gi, 136.;
Innanna-Erin-''', 30, I ; 161.
Isin, 25, 228, 3; 234. See also Ni-si-
in-'i-na.
U-ku-un-Sin, 30, i ; 235.
K.
ICa-dingir-ra-W; see Babylon.
Ka-gal-ad-"', 190. See also Aga and
Salma.
Kar-har-U, 259, 260, 264, 282, 419.
Kar-kar, 97, 106.
KAR-UD-NUN-ki, 329. See alsa'Nun-^i,
Ud-kib-nun-", and Ud-nun-''.
Kar(TE)-zi-da->'i, 260, 39. See also
under ' Buildings ' and Winsir) Uru-
ki-Kar-zi-da.
Ka-5al-lu-w, 158, 163, 190, 256, 285 ;
302, XII.
Ki-an-ki, 137.
Ki-en-gi (alone), 45, 46 ; 82, 3; 136 ;
122, I ; 145, 213, 216, 217, 220.
Ki-en-gi-M-Urdu, 21, 35; 30, i; 45,
216,222-225,230-233,242. See also
Shamer and Akkad.
Ki-Innanna-ab-ki, 131, 137. See also
Innanna-ab-'''.
Ki-maS-ti, 27, 190, 245, 253, 263, 2S0,
283, 285; 314, 2; 324, 355, 357.
Gg
45°
INDICES
Ki-nu-nir-W, i6i ; 182, i ; 285, 332,
354. 389, 391. 393, 395. 397. 399-
See also Bar-sip-''', Borsippa.
K5s-''i, 45, 46 ; 82, 4 ; 91, 98, no, 112,
123, 125, 129, 143, 161 (aiu KM-"'),
163; 180, 2; 212, 241; 25-5, 12, el
passim.
Kts (without ki), i6, 12-1 ; 125,3; 128,
213,219.
Kis-edin-na, 82, 2 ; 83.
Ki-W'nglr) utu, 82, 88. See also Larsa.
Koptos, 191, I ; 192. See also Gubin.
Kurdistan, see Gu-ti-im.
Kutha, 218, 224, 225, 238, 285 ; 310, 4.
See also TIK-GAB-A-'f'.
Lagash, 47. See also- Sir-pur-la-''^.
Larsa, 130, 222, 225, 286, 328. See also
Ki-('3''elO Utu and UD-UNU(G)-'>'-
(GA).
Lebanon, 73, 191. See also Ibla.
Lulubi, 127, 175, i8o, 266 nt. i; 312^
5 ; written
Lu-lu-be-'''-im, 177; or
Lu-lu-bu-''', 264, 48 ; or
Lu-Iu-bu-um-*', 253 ; 263,. 47 a ;_
264, 279, 283, 285, 292, 302, 427,
429 ; or
Lu-bu, 263, 47 a.
Lum-ma-dim-5ar, 83, 90; 92, 4, 11.
Lum-ma-gir-nun-ta-Sag-azag-^i-pad-da,
83, 88 nt.
Lum-ma-sir-ta, 83, 96, 104..
M.
JMJi-al, 69, 63, 68.
M^-gan-'d, 59, 16 ; 89,7; 158,161-163,
190, 198, 203, 210, 214.
Ma-kal-M, 91, 22. See also Ma-um-'''.
Mar-''', 285. See also W'ne'r) Nin-Mar-'''.
Marad-da-''', 300, V. See also 'A/xop-
SoKaia.
Mar'ash =
Mar-ha-Si-''',' 257, 19; 282; 314, 2.
Mar-tu-", 157, 163, 166, 190, 376 ;
292, ^.
Mar-tu-am, 159. See also Amurm.
Ma-uru-'", 30, i ; 91, 22. See also
Ma-kal-i-'.
Meditenanean Sea, 130, 214, 215, 284.
Meluhha, 161, 198.
Mi-lim-M(-me), 82, 88, 95.
Mugheir, 46; 150, 2. See also Uru-
um-*'-ma.
.... mu-tuk .... -''■, 30, I.
N.
-\m : bnn nnjn, see id-nun.
1^3, 63, 7. See also, A-idinna.
Nam-nun-da-kx-gar-ra, 83, loi, 103,
106, 107.
Nim(-ma)-'d, 30, i ; 2361 See also
Elamtu-'''.
Nina-"', 46, 54, 85, 161, 193, 284, 332,
335. 354-
Nina-ii'-tum-ma, 54, 82.
Nippur, 46, 122, 150, 151; 160,3; 161,
171, 214,222-225,228, 285 ; 299,11.;
321,416. See also 'En-\&-^^.
Ni-si-ln-'d-na, 25; 228, 3; 230, 231.
See also Isin.
NUN-W, 269, 9, Se^ also Eridng-'i',
Urudug-'''..
Padir, 177. See also Ba-ti-ir.
Palestine, 309.
Persian Gulf, 130, 214, 215, 284.
S, S, §.
Salma, mountain, 190, 4. See also
Ka-gal-ad-'''.
Sangara, 214. See also IVJE',
Ser-i-Pul, 177.
IV. CITIES, LANDS, ETC.
45 1
Shatt-el-^ai, 46, iii, 112, 150.
Shatt-el-Kehr, 228, 3.
SMmash, 314, 2.
Shumer and Akkad, 216, 284, 285, 286.
See also Ki-en-gi-l-Urdu.
Si-ma-LUM(num), 276, 283.
Si-mai-ki-im, 255, 12.
Si-mu-ru-um-M (i^I,^), 259, 260, 263,
264, 282, 283, 292, 300 ; written also
Si-mn-iir-ru-um-", 253; or
Si-mu-ir-um-'"', 263, 47 a-; =
Simyra, 263, 47 a.
Sippar, if;4, 161, 171. See also UD-
KIB-NUN-ki.
.... SU-", 161.
Su-kur-ru-M, 302, XI.
Su(n)-gir, 216. See also Gir-su-".
Suri, 158.
Susa, see Sa-a-ia-".
Syria, 285, 309.
Sab-ban-"', 213, 1. See.also Uh-", Upi
^ (Opis).
Sa-a-§a-*', 236. See. also Susa.
ga-a§-ru-«, 262, 283, 325, 432; also
written
.^a-aS-ni-um-"', 253, 268, 293, 325,
Sag, 91, 17.
Si, 30, 1.
■1V3B', 58, 6; 216. See also Sangara
and Shumer and Akkad.
gir-pur-la-w, 46 ff., 181 ff., 281, et pas-
sim ; written without ki, 63, 64 ; also
Pur-Mr-la, 55.
Pur-la-§ir, 59, nt. 16,
Sir-la-W-pur, 84, 85, 106, 107, 113,
116, 117, 118, 120.
Sir-la-pur-"!, 108, 113, 116.
SIT-TAR-W, 30, J.
TE(-W),95. I-
Te-li-ti-", 329-
Tell Ibrahim, 218. See also Kutha.
Tell-Loh, 46, 321. See also Lagash
and Sir-pur-Ia-".
Te-zi-da-", 255, 10; 260, 39. See
also Kar-zi-da-W.
Tidanum, mountain, 190; =
Ti-id-ni-im-'l, 276, 4; 376.
Tigris, 97, III, 130, 214, 21S, 309- S"
also Idigna.
Tik-ab-ba-w, 332, 354, 357, 359, 361,
387, 401.
TIK-GAB-A-W, 224, 3; 237, I. See
also Kutha.
Tilmnn^Tylos, 191, 2.
Tripolis, 263, 47 a.
Tu-tu-W, 174.
U.
Ubara-"', 258, 20.
UB-DA-", 18, i; 157.
UD-KIB NUN-M, 161, I. See also
Sippar.
UD-NUN-M, 301, IX.
UD-UNU(G)-"(-GA)> 8o> 136. See
alsoLarsa.
Uh-H, 82, 89, 91; 124, 13; 159, 161,
213, I. See also Sab-ban-*' and Upi.
Unug-l^-a, 161. See also Erech and
Warka.
U"vig-"-ga, 27, 29 ; 44, 3 ; 82, 87, 94,
132, 133. 138, iS2> 153, 225. 230,
231, 332-
Unug-ii'-gi (sic), 136.
ki-Unug-k'-gi, 136. (For this latter
writing, see Innanna-ab-"'.)
Upi = Opis, 213, I. See also Sab-ban-"'
and Uh-M.
Ur, written Uru-unu(g)-'''-(ma) and
transcribed by us : Uru-um-i'i-(ma),
21, 22, 25, 27, 30, 1 ; 88, 221, 222, ef
passim. Once
Urn-unu(g)-*i-e, 136.
Ur-bil-lum-"', 253, 264, 266, 283, 359,
361,387, 389, 391, 395, 397. 399, 427-
452
INDICES
Urdu, 216, 220. See also A-ga-de-''',
Bur-bur, and Shumer and Akkad.
Ur-in-gi, 191.
Uru-azag-ga, 46, 75, 83, 85 ; 182, 1 ;
202, 204, 205, 20'j, 209, 2IO. Once
Uru-azag-gi, 205.
Uru + inserted A-a-", 117; = GiSgal ?
Urudug-isi (written NUN-*')> 114. 230,
231, 292. See also Eridug-i^i.
Uruk, 285. See also Erech, U"ng-i!i-g^.
W.
Warka, 27, 29, 46, 82, 273, 321. See
also U"ug-ki-g^.
Wasit-el-Hai, iii.
Z.
Za-ap-§a-li-''i, 27, 277, 279, 283.
Zab, 162, 175.
Za-ha-ra-[a ?], 159.
Za-rad-im-''', 329.
OXFORD: HORACE HART
PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY
ma ■ V . . .
N\^*
. ^ \ . .
S'?^ ^"■%^^"• <'nV>V ■* . n X ^"■N\N ^ \
■w>k^%'''^'' ^\^\<!nN\ \nW\n
<^0
^ >\ ^^\"^•^ ^ \-NN V nN n
\ \ N
\N V . \ »V V, ^
^ •5vN *\^
■ ■ ■'■ -^
\N
iiiJBiM^M jjhaiM&ii>a*i«j
Live Music
Archive
Librivox
Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland
Museum of Art
Internet
Arcade
Console Living Room
Open Library
American
Libraries
TV News
Understanding
9/11